AJC.com > Opinion > Woman to Woman > Archives > 2007 > February > 08 > Entry
Should visual pro-life protests be handled differently from other forms of protest?
Shaunti Feldhahn, a right-leaning columnist, writes the commentary this week and Diane Glass, a left-leaning columnist, responds.
Shaunti Feldhahn, a right-leaning columnist, writes the commentary this week and Diane Glass, a left-leaning columnist, responds.
Commentary
Consider this number: 48 million people. That is nearly one-sixth the current number of Americans. It’s also the population of Spain and Switzerland put together.
It’s also the number of babies aborted since Roe v. Wade became law thirty-four years ago. And around that sad anniversary, pro-life groups often set up visual displays protesting abortion. For example, the Georgia Tech College Republicans recently created a “Cemetery of the Innocent” on the main lawn near the student center. Properly approved ahead of time, the display included 48 white crosses arranged in rows, one for each million lives that never got to be lived.
Visual displays have a punch, because with one image they immediately bypass all the intellectual constructs that we raise to avoid an unpalatable truth. And this is especially true on the emotion-charged abortion issue, where all pro-life groups have the same goal: to wake people up to the fact that abortion takes a life. And displays that picture the gruesome reality are one of the only ways to do it.
Think about it. Forty-eight million is a massive number; a holocaust in human lives. But even so, it’s just a statistic on a page. Seeing that number printed doesn’t have nearly the emotional impact of seeing row after row of baby-sized crosses on a lawn. Which is why, apparently, some people would prefer that we not see it.
After the College Republicans spent a dozen hours erecting the display, someone else stole it during the night. As CR rep David Hotle put it, “Abortion is a controversial issue, but rather than engage in debate and dialogue, someone chose to steal our display and deprive other students of the opportunity to see and experience the display’s message.”
Pro-choice groups often claim that visual protests such as this one, or pictures of aborted babies, are manipulating emotions. So they want to restrict them - or prevent them altogether.
While there is a need for some care (displays that are appropriate for adults may not be, for kids), it is critically important to protect this type of free speech. Because it may be the only true portrayal of abortion that some people are ever really confronted with.
Rebuttal
A more realistic representation of aborted fetuses isn’t a mountain of baby shoes or a string of tiny tombstones. It’s a picture of an adult carjacker, high on crack, who winds up in our prison system.
Freakonomics author Steven Levitt found a 30 percent crime rate decline in the years following the legalization of abortion in states with a higher abortion rate. You see, the moneyed can always find a way to get an abortion. They can fly to another country or even decide to raise a child alone, knowing that financial security assures them a degree of stability.
It’s those with little resource who are shouldered with the responsibility of caring for a child, while struggling alone, who face the consequences of a child raised in poverty, in instability, in a place no one would want to call home. And these were the people getting abortions, which consequently decreased the crime rate. There are practical reasons why women have abortions, reasons brushed over by simplistic shock-value visuals used by the religious right.
But making such dry, logical arguments isn’t what faith is about. Truth is something you experience, not reach by deduction. Look at Catholic history and you’ll see a past ripe with visual stimuli, from altars and stained glass, sculptures and hymns, to endless troves of paintings, commissioned by the devout. These works of art were meant to move the everyman to new spiritual heights, however feeble a parishioner’s comprehension of the written word.
And this Christian artistic sensibility trickles into modern thought. Just look at our fascination with long, lean supermodels, with chilly demeanors. Compare this to post-Renaissance paintings, where the subjects’ heads were precariously balanced on elongated necks and limbs, purposely stretched out to denote a subject’s divinity, but as corporeally improbable as Barbie’s waistline.
So while visual displays and protests may be effective and their effects last for years, their impact doesn’t make them true. Using shock value by lining up tiny tombstones is just a way to advertise. Unfortunately, this brand of advertising leads some of us to draw wrong conclusions about what may be a very complex issue — like abortion.
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By ProWoman
February 9, 2007 05:06 PM | Link to this
oh jeesh can everybody stop obsessing about wombs & fetus’s?
Abortion isn’t murder stop acting so ignorant people ! This isn’t the 1500’s ! ! The earth isn’t flat ! & doesn’t revolve around the moon ! idiots.
Everybody should be more worried about PENIZE’Z.
By FreedomUSA
February 9, 2007 05:19 PM | Link to this
“Cemetery of the Innocent” ? More like Cemetery for the brainless that think abortion is murder. And these people are considered educated? Where has the logic gone? I just don’t get this debate. It’s so creepy to be so obsessed with women’s wombs. To claim any of these people actually care about real baby’s is a joke. What do they think will happen if a million baby’s are born state-forced? Who’s going to feed these baby’s? Who’s going to pay for their care? Where are these baby’s going to live?
Who is going to pay for all the medical care & lost wages of the women forced to give birth?
Abortion is NOT MURDER so this entire uproar is ridiculous & a huge waste of money.
Those GA Tech students should be suspended for being so ignorant & sent off to UTAH.
By James Walden
February 12, 2007 08:12 AM | Link to this
HEY!!! why not Settle the Abortion debate once and for all? We are able to behold heart surgeries, colonoscopy exams and virtually any other graphic surgery on television ‘health’ programs/ Let these stations tape and document a few abortions and this way the proof of ‘is this murder’ will be settled.
By Brian Curtis
February 12, 2007 08:21 AM | Link to this
No, that would settle the question “Is this gross?”
Well, they’ve finally broached the topic. The A-word. Zack and chuck’s Favorite Topic in All the Universe.
The heck with this, I’m stayin’ away this week. There’s just no point.
By Me
February 12, 2007 08:22 AM | Link to this
I see all these people protesting abortion, however how many of them sign up to adopt the children of the women who don’t want them.
It IS possible for a woman to become pregnant while on birth control. All abortions are not a result of careless women.
While I do NOT believe that abortion should be used as a form of birth control, I do believe that women should have the right to do what they wish with their bodies.
I see reports every day of 13/14/15 year olds giving birth. What kind of life can these kids, yes KIDS offer a baby. They likely won’t finish school which puts them in a minimum wage job at best. More than likely they will wind up on the welfare system. Read some statistics of kids who grow up in that system. Yes, some make it however many just produce another generation in the system.
By MovingtoUtah
February 12, 2007 08:25 AM | Link to this
Hmmmmm….so if abortion isn’t murder, what should we call it when someone deliberately kills another human being? A fetus, with a heardbeat and brain activity, is certainly not an inert object.
If abortion is justified by lowering the crime rate, can I take it that liberals and pro-choice (pro-murder) advocates are all in favor of capital punishment for all crimes? Wow, think what an impact THAT would have on the crime rate.
How about we simply treat the subject truthfully? A baby would be inconvenient for some mothers, so we allow them to kill their babies instead. Shame on us….
By Chris Pettigrew
February 12, 2007 08:33 AM | Link to this
HEY!! Think about this. They give these two boys ten years for killing a puppy, and they should go to prison. Women and doctors murder over four thousand babies a day and they are protected by the same courts that send boys to prison over killing a DOG! Crazy! Without natural affection. The world is going to hell! Better wake up!
By James Walden
February 12, 2007 08:39 AM | Link to this
15 year olds giving birth. What kind of life can these kids offer a baby ??? You admit abortion is killing a baby/ You also said my wife should be dead. Her mother was a minor. Maybe on your argument anyone born to a minor should be shot on site.
‘all in the name of choice’ right??
oh - she got pregnant in 1985 and was forced into an abortion, recourse. No - because we were argued that ALL abortions are CHOICE.
By Me
February 12, 2007 08:47 AM | Link to this
I didn’t say your wife should be killed. I said the choice should be out there.
How do you feel about the anti-abortion people who say that it is okay in cases of rape/incest? Does rape or incest make the child any less human in your opionon?
This is something that is a heated debate on both sides of the fence. I respect your opinions and won’t bash them but I ask that you respect mine as well.
At 13 years old a child is in the 8th grade. A 13 year old while being pregnant will think that babies are all fun and games. They are cute, you get to go buy cute clothes for them, yadda yadda yadda.
How are they going to get money to pay for the necessicities like food? Some can make it and stay in school. There should be more statistics on how many pregnant teens actually graduate?
By K9
February 12, 2007 08:48 AM | Link to this
I guess Diane and Shaunti were concerned when last week’s topic died after just one day, so they decided to go with abortion this week. Because I am a man, I’ve been informed by my owner that I’m not allowed to have an opinion, so I’m going to play it smart and keep my mouth shut this week.
By ABS
February 12, 2007 08:52 AM | Link to this
In 1992, eight days before the election, my husband, two year old son and myself went to a rally in Huntsville, AL where Al Gore was speaking. There were anti-abortion protestors present with huge color posters with the very disturbing image of aborted fetuses (sp?) with the word “Gore” written under them. To me….that is terrorism, plain and simple.
In 1989, I went with my friend to an abortion clinic and had to walk past about 10 men screaming “murderer” to me and my friend who was traumatized - she had been left by her boyfriend after he found out she was pregnant.
Again….terrorism….
These religious right zealots can scream all they want, but abortion will never just disappear…whether or not YOU think its murder is irrelevant to those of us who believe everyone has the right to choose.
Abortion is not a black and white issue, it will always be gray and using terroristic means to try and advance your personal agenda will never be tolerated by the mainstream.
By MovingToUtah
February 12, 2007 08:56 AM | Link to this
Sorry, but you can’t justify a murder based on an economic decision. Using that logic, should we also kill alzheimer patients, the mentally and physically disabled, and perhaps all those with low IQ’s or maybe just those above a certain age still with low credit scores or low wages?
And ME, you are correct about the rape and incest arguement. A true pro-life position would not have these exceptions, but would support the mother thru the birth of her baby which could then be placed for adoption.
Murder can not be justified…it is just wrong.
By SusieHomeMaker
February 12, 2007 08:58 AM | Link to this
Hmmmmm….so if abortion isn’t murder, what should we call it when someone deliberately kills another human being? A fetus, with a heardbeat and brain activity, is certainly not an inert object
Can this fetus with a heartbeat and SOME brain activity live independenetly outside the womb? If the answer is NO then it is not ALIVE. If it is not alive, therefore there can not be any form of KILLING, (murder).
You and I have proven to be able to live independently outside of the womb. If someone harms us fatally it is considered murder.
By Nancy B
February 12, 2007 08:59 AM | Link to this
Why occasionally is there is a link saying: Suggest a topic for Shaunti and Diane—when they debate the same old topics ad nauseam? Sure, the abortion topic might draw hits to this website but never does the rhetoric change—nor will it—so the whole delight of having a blog where women can identify or create some kind of roundtable discussion is completely lost to even the women who make this blog—fun to read—the audience. We know—we know who stands on each side of this endless debate—we know why. We dont change their opinions, we dont bring new converts to the operating table for a: feel good approach to abortion. Abortion is not a complex issue. You get one or you dont. Its between a woman and her life—so be it these two sides are on the same mobius strip.
Shaunti always debates that public space should be used for private causes. Has she ever said: maybe chanting: no more deaths might disrupt a patient visit to her doctor? No. She also does not care if life-holders protest hospices where people are searching for respectful death—because its her way or the highway. Maybe holding up signs of fetus’ during traffic generated by moms picking kids up from school is not free protest—but an invasion of disrespect? Nah, its all the same.
Diane always condescends the pro-lifers are blindly-following subordinates, the uneducated believers of boring religions and she always contrives a paragraph to show how above she is from them. Then she launches into a completely ludicrous pity party advocating abortions for the poor—like does she not have time to read the same statistics that its not the poor having abortions—but the well off, higher educated?
What about the lack of OBGYN doctors, ladies? Where is that issue or topic? OBGYN care affects women, don’t you think? Sure abortion can be made illegal but can you get a pap smear in every GA county? NO! Why not? Because anti-abortion activists also target OBGYN doctors and clinics. OBGYN doctors have higher insurance rates than cardiologists—why? Why is it everyone rallies for/against but these two topic searching mavens never mention that receiving an OBGYN care is off limits in very rural areas because of price and because of lack of clinics?
So here it is another abortion debate. How very boring.
By MovingToUtah
February 12, 2007 09:02 AM | Link to this
ABS, I’m just curious as to why photos showing the truth of the procedure was so frightening to you? After all, the photos simply showed exactly what was going to take place. Gruesome, horrible, and terrible as it may be, it was still the truth. As to screaming at your friend, that was wrong. Not terrorist, but still wrong. I would have been much more helpful if those same people had found a way to help your friend and still show her the result of her actions should she proceed. My church doesn’t protest in that fashion, but we do support a crisis pregnancy center offering counseling, job training, job finding, financial and moral support to expecting mothers so that their financial situation doesn’t drive their moral decision. Hopefully more will do the same
By K9
February 12, 2007 09:04 AM | Link to this
At any rate, the issues at hand appear to be the following:
(1) In our society, we greatly value individual freedom, but accept restrictions on our freedom in situations in which exercising such freedom may result in harm to ourselves or others.
(2) Pregnancy is a unique situation insofar as two individuals are occupying the same body for 9 months.
By Chilao
February 12, 2007 09:13 AM | Link to this
Planting all those little crosses are a freedom of speech issue and that kind of protest should not be prohibited.
Removing the same little crosses also a freedom of speech issue. They were on public property, after all. Had they been on private property the removal would have to be considered criminal stealing.
My first thought was what material were they made from? and where there enough to make some hobby thing, like a bird cage? (thinking of material like popsicle sticks)..LOL
I’m kind of with Brian Curtis there, for see ya next week as we get this topic quite well as it is.. LOL
By K9
February 12, 2007 09:15 AM | Link to this
Susie—I usually agree with you, but using the standard of “viability” to build a case for abortion just doesn’t cut it. Even after the baby is born, it is 100% dependent on its parents for food, etc. for several years, so is not truly “viable” in the sense that it can care for itself.
Using the standard of “viability”, are you saying the parents have the right to decide whether they want to continue feeding the baby or not after it is born as well? I’m not questioning you to cut you down or sway you to another point of view, just challenging the basis for your viewpoint.
By ABS
February 12, 2007 09:20 AM | Link to this
Terrorism - the political use of violence or intimidation.
Moving to Utah - You are basing your assumptions that if those who choose to have abortions would just “see the light” of their wrongdoings then every thing will be okay.
As for the rally I attended do you think an image of a dead teenager who is laying in a pool of her own blood after she has bled to death after performing her own abortion with the word “Gore” underneath would have been appropriate?
By K9
February 12, 2007 09:22 AM | Link to this
Chilao—I’m confused about your definition of free speech. Assuming the protest materials were legal to begin with, how is damaging, destroying, or stealing someone else’s display qualify as “free speech”? It sounds like an abridgment of free speech to me to take away the other person’s protest materials.
By Me
February 12, 2007 09:23 AM | Link to this
Excellent point K9.
It hasn’t necessarily changed my opinion on the topic, but it is a very valid point.
By FreedomUSA
February 12, 2007 09:24 AM | Link to this
Anti-woman-anti-choice groups are terrorists. Terrorists should not have a right to protest anything.
Abortion is not murder.
All those in favor of the terrorists should be adopting all the unwanted kids we already have.
or….shut the F@#$@#$ up you insane maniacs.
By suzan
February 12, 2007 09:24 AM | Link to this
This is What the law in the State of Georgia says about a fetus; Georgia: Legislation taking effect July 1, 2006 (SB 77) recognizes an “unborn child” (defined as “a member of the species homo sapiens at any stage of development who is carried in the womb”) as a victim of the offenses of feticide, voluntary manslaughter of an unborn child, assault of an unborn child, and battery of an unborn child. (Official Code of Georgia Annotated, Sections 16-5-20, 16-5-28, 16-5-29, 16-5-80)
Hmmm, if the fetus is not human then why do states charge people with murder, manslaughter etc…. if a fetus is killed by other means than abortion?
By ABS
February 12, 2007 09:25 AM | Link to this
One more thing I forgot to mention….those images didn’t scare me…they disgusted me. Terrorists do not scare me, they are disgusting in their idealistic ways of trying to intimidate the weak.
By K9
February 12, 2007 09:26 AM | Link to this
BTW—Is Diane arguing for eugenics in her connection of abortion to falling crime rates?? I wonder how much thought she put into that line of reasoning. Sounds pretty far right wing to me.
By 2D
February 12, 2007 09:30 AM | Link to this
Susie… You have probably put forth the most credible argument thus far for continuing to allow the legalization of this procedure. However… Based on your logic, I have to conclude that you believe there is a certain point at which it should be considered illegal. The real question would be what is that point, right?
Babies are born “premature” all of the time. I have nieces and nephews born 4-5 weeks premature. A person in my office had a child born 3 months premature. In fact, babies can be born as early as 5 months and live. I know someone who went through this traumatic event. That child is now thriving with the loving care of the parents. I’m not sure about much earlier than that, so, if someone knows different, please let me know. These babies are definitely capable of life outside the mother, perhaps with machines, but without need of the mother.
I know that the gender of a baby can be determined as early as 16 weeks. Perhaps not always, but definitely possible. If what is inside the woman has a brain, a heart, noticeable appendages and organs and a defined gender, is that a person, even if it is very small? These babies may not be capable of life outside the mother, but with these defined and noticable characteristics would they not be considered human beings?
While I personally abhor artifically terminating pregnancies, I know that the practice is as old as time itself, and do not want to have people sticking themselves with coat hangers or taking other drastic terms. We need to ensure that certain options are available to assist women in what can be a very difficult time, especially when their mortal life is in danger. However, we also need to build a culture that values all life, born and unborn.
By Freedom USA
February 12, 2007 09:30 AM | Link to this
susan most women get abortions really early. It could only be manslaughter if the woman has chosen to continue with the pregancy & she’s far along. And yes the woman decides if it’s going to be a baby or not.
HER body turns those cells into a baby.
Nobody else’s.
Abortion is not murder.
All those who are anti-choice-anti-woman are terrorists or terrorists supporters.
By K9
February 12, 2007 09:34 AM | Link to this
Me—A second line of reasoning which makes abortion “ok” is the idea that a fetus is somehow not “alive”. In a certain way, it makes some sense to say that a “clump of cells” is not equivalent to a fully formed baby. However, you are ultimately faced with the question of where to “draw the line” between life and non-life. No matter which way I slice it or dice it (no pun intended), I can’t find any logical dividing line.
By K9
February 12, 2007 09:39 AM | Link to this
Freedom and ABS—Do you have anything to add to the discussion other than chanting “terrorist” at those who disagree with your position? Do you have any reasoning behind your opinions, or are they just so self-evident that it is impossible to disagree?
By James Walden
February 12, 2007 09:40 AM | Link to this
my wife was born 6 months early . oooops! Maybe according to abortion advocates, she’s still not human.
By MBM
February 12, 2007 09:40 AM | Link to this
SusieHomeMaker, your argument (or philosphy) is extremely flawed. A newborn baby is still fully dependent on it’s mother for survival for at least the first few years of life. By your standard, if someone were to murder a mentally handicapped person then it wouldn’t be considered murder because he/she only has “SOME” brain activity and can’t survive on his/her own. Google Hitler’s “T-4” program that was instituted in Germany prior to WWI. He attempted to euthanize anyone who was mentally or physically handicapped because by Germany’s standards they did not have an appropriate “quality of life” nor could they make positive contributions to society.
How many of you realize that “Jane Roe” from Roe vs Wade is now an anti-abortion activist? Her name is Norma McCorvey. Google her story.
If any of you haven’t taken the time to view an abortion video, I highly recommend it. They are all over the web. Watch one and then make your decision. Don’t blindly defend abortion simply because you may have had one and are feeling guilty about it now. I have many friends that have had them and staunchly defend themselves by claiming it’s not murder. They refuse to watch a video or even look at pictures which speaks volumes about what their conscience is telling them. There’s forgiveness for every wrong.
By suzan
February 12, 2007 09:45 AM | Link to this
At lest 33 states call the death of a fetus murder. Yet abortion is a choice. it seems that we are somewhat confused regarding whether a fetus is a viable being.
In my mind there is no question. A fetus is an unborn child. for those of you who wish to deny this, for convenience sake, it does not change the truth. The world has reCongnized throughout time that a fetus is a human. It is only in this century that we have begun calling the child a mass of cells. You can try and justify this anyway you wish but a fetus is a living being. It deserves the same respect as all living beings. How can the murder of a fetus be against the law and abortion not be considered pre-meditated murder?
By Freedom USA
February 12, 2007 09:46 AM | Link to this
k9 a fetus is not a baby. A grown woman has final say so on what happens to her body. A grown woman has final say-so on the medical decisions that will affect her body, health, life & mind.
It’s not a baby till a woman decides to grow one. Nobody else will have that physical toll & risks except her.
end of story.
All anti-choice-anti-women are no different than terrorists.
There’s no debating with terrorists.
Terrorists have no right to protest anything.
By Freedom USA
February 12, 2007 09:47 AM | Link to this
mbm you going to pay for & care for all those forced-birth baby’s?
By Chilao
February 12, 2007 09:48 AM | Link to this
K9 - the cross removers are making the same political statement the cross planters are. (New name, same ole dog? I had to Glock a few off of my porch this weekend)
anybody hear on NPR Sunday morning, their Religion Today show,(or some name like that)? They had a pro-life evangelical on that wanted the pro-lifers (in Congress) to address the reasons why someone might be in a position to even want an abortion. Seems most are lower socioeconomic classes(per him). And he was suprised somewhat that while Congressional GOP pro-lifers were very anti-abortion, they did not want to address any underlining needs to want to have one.
I am trying to find the story at NPR.
By Freedom USA
February 12, 2007 09:49 AM | Link to this
MBM you should take time time to watch a forced-birth of a 15 year old with no money or family support. I highly recommend it.
By Chilao
February 12, 2007 09:50 AM | Link to this
the NPR show is Interfaith Voices.
By lozen
February 12, 2007 09:51 AM | Link to this
Oh, what a great new topic of conversation! Who comes up with these questions and topics? Lend me your ears Diane, Shaunti, editors, et all: There are so many interesting topics to discuss on this board that effect women and our lives. Let’s move on shall we?
If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament. Men would be given medals for sacrificing their “fatherhood” for the good of all. Abortion would be a painless procedurej- probably a pill that would do the job. Everyone would know a man could not bring every fetus to term because he has more important things to do. There would be a day dedicated to the selfless “fathers” who chose to sacrifice to make the world a better place.
By Chilao
February 12, 2007 09:51 AM | Link to this
there’s a brief of the story, second item:
http://www.interfaithradio.org/
By Me
February 12, 2007 09:53 AM | Link to this
K9, you have some of the most well thought out comments I have read. Thank you for that.
While my opinion still hasn’t changed, I don’t agree all anti-abortion supporters are terrorists. It is not my place to judge people or call names.
This is a world where we eventually all have to agree to disagree. I completely respect others comments.
I think as a whole we are fooling ourselves into thinking that by teaching abstinence, we are helping our children. I know that some will say that by teaching them about safe sex, we are condoning the actions.
I live in the real world where sex is promoted freely, yet when we try to promote safe sex, we are hit with opposition. I don’t get it. I really don’t.
Although absitnence is the only sure way to avoid an unwanted pregnancy, only a small percentage of our population (adults and children) are following that.
By ABS
February 12, 2007 10:00 AM | Link to this
K9-Oh, I certainly do not think all those who disagree with me are terrorists, everyone is certainly entitled to their opinion I’m simply responding to the column.
Abortion is not a black and white issue…and you can never speak for everyone who is in a life crisis of this magnitude and even presume to think you can “help” them when faced with such a horrible decision.
These individuals who think that you can adopt all the aborted babies, and help those who choose to have the baby instead of adopting…how are you going to do that? If someone would please tell me the logistics of how a plan like that would work, then I’d be really glad to listen….just how are you going to finance it? How are you going to counsel all those women?
By K9
February 12, 2007 10:00 AM | Link to this
Freedom—Certainly you are entitled to your opinions. Can you support them in any way other than to make absolutist statements such as:
k9 a fetus is not a baby.
without providing any reasoning at all?
Again, you may be so convinced of the rightness of your position that you feel no need to explain yourself further, although my personal suspicion is that you haven’t given any thought to the underlying considerations of what constitutes “life”.
By kimberly
February 12, 2007 10:00 AM | Link to this
Freedom of speech should prevail. As such, I retain my right to tell you anti-freedom, woman-controlling, religio freaks who want to make decisions about other people’s bodies to STFU! Try waving a sign in my face, and I’ll knock you right on your sanctimonious A—. I can prove self defense, you know, as you were trying to hit me with your sign. You people are violent, sick, crazed doctor killers and clinic bombers. I’ll put my second amendment rights up next to your first. Bring it, you sick bunch of un-American freedom haters.
By 2D
February 12, 2007 10:02 AM | Link to this
Freedom… Are you purporting that a woman can make that determination up until the time the actual time of delivery???
By blablabla
February 12, 2007 10:06 AM | Link to this
a couple of comments and then i’ll be sitting this one on the sidelines like brian and chilao.
diane’s response is pitiful. her position that abortion has lessened crime really has nothing to do with abortion. instead, it’s an argument for better education and a better social safety net for children born into and the people living in poor conditions. lowering crime is not an objective of abortion and if our society worked a little better, lower crime rates wouldn’t be some coincidental benefit of abortion either.
and trying to tie pictorial imagery of abortion at protests to catholic artistry is one of the bigger leaps out there. are we really to believe that emotion-tugging imagery in other contexts are linked to the catholic church? please.
ABS - i’m sorry, but…
There were anti-abortion protestors present with huge color posters with the very disturbing image of aborted fetuses (sp?) with the word “Gore” written under them. To me….that is terrorism, plain and simple.
…is not terrorism just because you don’t like it or just because you say it is. your definition of terrorism is the most broad i’ve ever seen. a picture of an aborted fetus doesn’t attack you or doesn’t threaten you in any way. by your definition, if i am intimidated by a political sign someone puts up, that qualifies as terrorism. that is simply preposterous.
FreedomUSA - how appropriate a name, since you appear to abhor freedom for those who disagree with you.
if somebody wanted to be really smart and do diane’s job for her, maybe they would argue why this particular form of expression should be restricted. and “because i don’t like it” isn’t an appropriate answer.
By MBM
February 12, 2007 10:06 AM | Link to this
Freedom USA, so a lack of material means is the standard by which we should decide who lives and who dies? Wow.
Just curious, have you ever had an abortion?
By SusieHomeMaker
February 12, 2007 10:07 AM | Link to this
Susie—I usually agree with you, but using the standard of “viability” to build a case for abortion just doesn’t cut it. Using the standard of “viability”, are you saying the parents have the right to decide whether they want to continue feeding the baby or not after it is born as well? I’m not questioning you to cut you down or sway you to another point of view, just challenging the basis for your viewpoint
You are deliberately misunderstanding my statement. Abortions are not performed after a certain period of time, (I think after 5 months), before the apppointed time abortions are legal. A fetus can live outside of the womb, (with help), after 5 months but not before, with or without help.
Parents feeding a child is not the issue — semantics aside, that was like comparing apples to cow kaka, (or bull$h#t).
By SusieHomeMaker
February 12, 2007 10:11 AM | Link to this
This is What the law in the State of Georgia says about a fetus; Georgia: Sections 16-5-20, 16-5-28, 16-5-29, 16-5-80)Hmmm, if the fetus is not human then why do states charge people with murder, manslaughter etc…. if a fetus is killed by other means than abortion
Doesn’t Georgia also allow abortions?
By K9
February 12, 2007 10:12 AM | Link to this
kim—Since chuck isn’t here, I’ll take up his banner and point out to you that only a small percentage of folks who oppose abortion are nutty, evil people who act in criminal ways. Are you lumping everyone who opposes abortion into one group?
By kimberly
February 12, 2007 10:12 AM | Link to this
ABS, these people do not CARE about the troubles of girls, women, or actual babies. They screech and protest and try to control other people’s lives ON PRINCIPLE. Listen to them redefine what it is by subsituting nouns of their own choosing. “Murder” or “baby” or “Life” or “Sin.” They’re just words. The care nothing about actual existing people, be they hungry, poor, sick, violated, scared, or born to a person who fits all the above. If they DID, they’d find a way to adopt, feed, innoculate, and educate, or prevent unplanned children. But no, only their “principles” are worth their effort.
By SusieHomeMaker
February 12, 2007 10:13 AM | Link to this
Susie… Based on your logic, I have to conclude that you believe there is a certain point at which it should be considered illegal. The real question would be what is that point, right?
The law already mandates this.
By ABS
February 12, 2007 10:17 AM | Link to this
Is that better? That’s from the Oxford English Dictionary. I was using my old Webster’s Dictionary earlier. Sorry about that.
Like most blogs people get heated about the subject and forget about the column itself. Again, I’m not trying to name call or even debate the abortion issue itself….I was simply giving examples earlier of how anti-abortion protestors get way out of line.
I have to go to work now…..It’s been fun! Continue on!
By K9
February 12, 2007 10:17 AM | Link to this
Susie—The problem with the “viability” argument is it substitutes a discussion of medical technology in place of one about values. I understand the appeal of doing so, but it doesn’t answer the most fundamental questions about what is life and what makes us individuals.
Although you somehow differentiate “viability” within the womb from the continued dependency of the child once it is born, I don’t see such a strong distinction.
By Hypocrite
February 12, 2007 10:19 AM | Link to this
From Kimberly:
“You people are violent, sick….”
“Try waving a sign in my face, and I’ll knock you right on your sanctimonious A—”
Hello, hypocrite. Wave at the birdie!
By K9
February 12, 2007 10:23 AM | Link to this
kim—The last I checked, the State takes care of children whose parents are unable (or unwilling) to do so. I’m not saying these kids have a great life in foster care, but some of them go on to become great people (like Truitt Cathy and Dave Thomas). For you to say that an early death is the best outcome for unwanted children seems pretty heartless.
By SusieHomeMaker
February 12, 2007 10:25 AM | Link to this
my wife was born 6 months early . oooops! Maybe according to abortion advocates, she’s still not human
That’s impossible. That would mean she was born at 3 months of gestation — even now in 2007 medical science has not advanced so much that it can save a fetus born at 3 months gestation. Try again.
SusieHomeMaker, your argument (or philosphy) is extremely flawed. A newborn baby is still fully dependent on it’s mother for survival for at least the first few years of life. By your standard, if someone were to murder a mentally handicapped person then it wouldn’t be considered murder because he/she only has “SOME” brain activity and can’t survive on his/her own
I’ve already answered this. Please refer to an earlier post.
Don’t blindly defend abortion simply because you may have had one and are feeling guilty about it now.
Don’t blindly attack them because of something that you’ve HEARD and what you’ve heard has no basis in fact or science.
I have many friends that have had them and staunchly defend themselves by claiming it’s not murder. They refuse to watch a video or even look at pictures which speaks volumes about what their conscience is telling them
I refuse to watch videos of the war in Iraq, what is that action “speaking” to you about?
There’s forgiveness for every wrong
Thank you for forgiving — now that you have forgiven people for their wrongs, could you maybe be quiet about it now? Ever heard of forgive and forget?
By MBM
February 12, 2007 10:26 AM | Link to this
SusieHomeMaker, America once had laws on the books that allowed slavery. Germany had laws on their books that legalized the Holocaust. In Pakistan, you can be put to death for converting to a religion other than Islam. Until the 21st century, women and blacks couldn’t vote in this country…because the Law said so. Obviously, you can see the problem with using the simple argument such as “The Law already mandates this”. You should be arguing this issue from a scientific and philisophical viewpoint. Scientifically, when does life begin? Philisophically, who should determine whether or not that life should live or die?
By mp3 venegas gratis
February 12, 2007 10:28 AM | Link to this
http://www.chikungunya.net/astuce/000000cd.htm carisoprodol online carisoprodol buy carisoprodol buy carisoprodol http://www.som.yale.edu/AnalystReports/forum/topic.asp?TOPICID=1970 generic xenical xenical buy xenical generic xenical http://trecwawa.ifrance.com/img/index/24.htm mp3 venegas gratis mp3 venegas gratis mp3 venegas gratis mp3 venegas gratis mp3 venegas gratis
By MovingToUtah
February 12, 2007 10:28 AM | Link to this
Isn’t every woman deciding to have an abortion “making a decision about someone else’s body”? (the fetus)
Even if the erroneous event that it was only the woman’s body, aren’t there decisions about our own bodies that our government doesn’t allow us to make? I can’t decide, in the privacy of my own home, to use certain drugs. I can’t decide to view certain images, even if computer generated. Viability certainly can’t be the “standard” by which we judge the right to survice else we’d have to send hit squads to all of the alzheimer centers.
Funny how some would shriek protests at the top of their lungs to protest several thousand volunteer soldiers dying, and at the same time shriek even louder to protect the murder of innocent millions.
My teenage daughter was, like most teenagers, all in favor of abortion. Then she went to the recent museum exhibit showing bodies (evidently including babies in the womb). Her comment was, OMG, they really ARE babies. Funny how that changed her perspective on abortion.
What it ultimately comes down to is freedom, but not just for the mother. We should be free to do that which doesn’t harm another. Abortion does. A baby is a life. A baby is a gift. A baby is a blessing. A baby is not a choice.
By mp3 venegas gratis
February 12, 2007 10:30 AM | Link to this
http://www.chikungunya.net/astuce/000000cd.htm carisoprodol online carisoprodol buy carisoprodol buy carisoprodol http://www.som.yale.edu/AnalystReports/forum/topic.asp?TOPICID=1970 generic xenical xenical buy xenical generic xenical http://trecwawa.ifrance.com/img/index/24.htm mp3 venegas gratis mp3 venegas gratis mp3 venegas gratis mp3 venegas gratis mp3 venegas gratis
By Mara
February 12, 2007 10:33 AM | Link to this
K9 - Even after the baby is born, it is 100% dependent on its parents for food, etc. for several years
Nope. It’s dependant on someone for et cetera.
MBM - * A newborn baby is still fully dependent on it’s mother for survival for at least the first few years of life*
Nope. A newborn baby is not dependant on its MOTHER for survival. It is dependant on a caregiver of any type.
you see, both of you are wrong. A fetus can only be nourished by its mothers body. A fetus is dependant upon its mother for oxygenating and circulating its blood, for digesting its food and extracting the nutrients, etc. A fetus cannot exist without being physically attached to its mother.
A baby can exist without its mother. A baby breathes air into its own lungs, pumps blood from its own heart, and sends the oxygenated blood through its own body. A baby ingests and digests nourishment (which can be provided by ANYONE!) through their own stomach and intestines. And so on.
A fetus cannot exist without a womb.
A baby can.
simple.
By MovingToUtah
February 12, 2007 10:34 AM | Link to this
Kimberly, wow you are so bitter. I didn’t know you had insight into how I spent my time and money. Actually, both the church I attend and I DO spend time and money putting those principles into action. Not by intimidating or threatening expectant mothers, but in counseling, job training, and support to help them have other options. It’s not the governments role to help the unfortunate, it is OURS.
By kimberly
February 12, 2007 10:35 AM | Link to this
Mongrel, at 10:23 you attributed words to me that I did not say. This makes you a liar. STFU, liar.
This “debate” is pointless. The question was actually one of free speech, which I support, even for people whose free speech seeks to remove the freedom of other people to determine their own lives. Protest and say whatever you want, but if you block the sidewalk or get in someone’s way while doing it, don’t be surprised when you find yourself on your a—.
Out of here. Holla when it’s time to support gay rights again.
By K9
February 12, 2007 10:40 AM | Link to this
you see, both of you are wrong. A fetus can only be nourished by its mothers body. A fetus is dependant upon its mother for oxygenating and circulating its blood, for digesting its food and extracting the nutrients, etc. A fetus cannot exist without being physically attached to its mother.
Sorry, Mara—Haven’t you heard of a Surrogate Mother? A fetus can live inside of a woman’s body that isn’t it’s biological mother’s. As such, your “uniqueness” argument doesn’t fly. And while we haven’t developed that ability to to “baby transplants” yet, I can envision that procedure happening one day. Once again, the core issue should be morality, not medical capability.
By SusieHomeMaker
February 12, 2007 10:40 AM | Link to this
There would be a day dedicated to the selfless “fathers” who chose to sacrifice to make the world a better place
HA!! Too funny but sadly so DANG true!!! Viagara once on the market was automatically picked up by health care institutes and covered on Drug plans — it took 20+ years for birth control to be covered on health plans and they STILL aren’t covered by all of them!! So, it’s allright to have drugs covered on a health plan so that men can have sex and possibly knock someone up. But it’s a major medical coup to have drugs on a health plan that PREVENT pregnancy!! Too funny!
By K9
February 12, 2007 10:44 AM | Link to this
kim—My 10:23 addressed the point you keep trying to make that it is difficult and expensive to raise a child. Your implication seems to be that if a woman isn’t guaranteed financial help in raising her child, then early death for the child is preferable. You keep challenging those who oppose abortion to pony up some money for daycare, etc. I was merely pointing out that we already do.
I don’t see any need for abusive language.
By kimberly
February 12, 2007 10:47 AM | Link to this
PS: MovingToUtah, if you don’t fit the group of people I described, then I wasn’t talking about you. Those who DO act on their beliefs to help others have my respect, even if we disagree on the legalities. I’ve met people who’ve adopted special needs babies; there are a few, and they’re good people. But that’s just one piece of the big picture. You’ll love Utah; the skiing is GREAT!
By SusieHomeMaker
February 12, 2007 10:48 AM | Link to this
Susie—The problem with the “viability” argument is it substitutes a discussion of medical technology in place of one about values
Whose values and whose beliefs? Medical technology is “what it is”, and in the advent that a child is born too early and is dependent upon medical technology to prolong its life, if the child in question is suffering from severe brain damage, or physical damage because of being born too soon, the parents have the option at that time to ask that all the equipment be removed to see if the child can sustain life on its own without technology.
Why aren’t you decrying that scenario once the child is out of the womb?
By K9
February 12, 2007 10:55 AM | Link to this
Susie—I dated a lady for several years who has a profoundly handicapped daughter. Her love for her daughter is not based on the girl’s abilities.
By SusieHomeMaker
February 12, 2007 10:55 AM | Link to this
SusieHomeMaker, America once had laws on the books that allowed slavery. …….Obviously, you can see the problem with using the simple argument such as “The Law already mandates this”
I was asked the question on when a fetus would be deemed not a fetus in order for an abortion to be peformed. I answered said question with that response.
You should be arguing this issue from a scientific and philisophical viewpoint. Scientifically, when does life begin
This has already been answered by the medical community. Countless, numerous, so MANY times before that I won’t belittle you by repeating it yet again.
Philisophically, who should determine whether or not that life should live or die
Philsophically should the STATE determine if someone should live or die by mandating EXECUTIONS? Philisophically should a commander or general or PRESIDENT determine if someone should live or die by sending them to war? Philisophically……we can go around this subject all day. As you recall, that’s what philosophers do!
By SusieHomeMaker
February 12, 2007 10:58 AM | Link to this
Sorry, Mara—Haven’t you heard of a Surrogate Mother? A fetus can live inside of a woman’s body that isn’t it’s biological mother’s. As such, your “uniqueness” argument doesn’t fly
K9 you’re picking hairs off of a bear’s butt and you know it. Substitute the word “mother” for “female” and her argument stands on its own and you KNOW this.
By MovingToUtah
February 12, 2007 11:05 AM | Link to this
kimberly….ok, apology accepted. I also know several people who have “adopted” expectant mothers after they were thrown out by their “real” families. I would actually agree with some of the pro-abortion posters that some anti-abortion protests go out of bounds when they attack the expectant mother. A confused, frightened teenager thinking she has no choices doesn’t need our attacks, condescension, or pity. She almost certainly needs our help, our support, and our prayers. I don’t have a lot of patience for those who attack but won’t reach out to help someone in need. OK, enough preaching for one day, I have to go make a living now.
By donnie's pixie
February 12, 2007 11:07 AM | Link to this
I had a “forced abortion”—I had a tubal pregnancy and had no choice in the matter. The baby wouldn’t have survived and I would have died from a ruptured tube.
That had to be the most traumatic day of my life.
Yes, I have been to clinics and hospitals alike trying to adopt those children who are unwanted by the birth mothers—to no avail. Yes, I would be happy to take and love another person’s child as my own.
I am a GT grad—-and very proud of the display. Uneducated you say? At least we know that the plural of baby is babies.
By Just Facts
February 12, 2007 11:08 AM | Link to this
Whats so funny is all of these passionate posts are balderdash! Pro or con it does not matter what side of the abortion issue you are on because the truth is some women have natural abortions, its called a miscarriage, its called a preemie: its called a fact of life and no law can put a woman in jail for a miscarriage—thus you have a Roe vs Wade decision that will never be repealed until miscarriages become illegal as premature births become illegal.
The debate is actually about what kind of visual protest can be put on public land. What about flag burning? Can I burn a field of crosses to protest say, the war in Iraq even if the crosses were symbols of someone else’s debate: why yes, says Shaunti. Everyone should be able to publicly protest on government or institution owned land. Diane just flaps her gums this week. So why cant I protest anti-smoking laws by lighting up? Cigarettes are LEGAL and by jove, civic protest is what makes this country great—so next time I see you at the Olive Garden with your family Shaunti, guess who is gonna take a long smoke and use your plate as an ashtray…public protest on private land? HA ha ha ha ha
By Freedom USA
February 12, 2007 11:08 AM | Link to this
OK everybody give up a kidney to save some kids. You have no choice in the matter because it will save kids.
Everybody give up blood every 2 months. You have no choice in the matter because it will save kids.
Everybody give up some bone marrow. You have no choice in the matter becuase it will save kids.
By K9
February 12, 2007 11:09 AM | Link to this
K9 you’re picking hairs off of a bear’s butt and you know it. Substitute the word “mother” for “female” and her argument stands on its own and you KNOW this.
Not really, Susie, just trying to get to the moral root of the issue. Mara made an argument that the baby’s dependency AFTER birth was different from its dependency BEFORE birth, based on the “uniqueness” of the mother, which I don’t particularly buy into. I stated at the outset today that I believe pregnancy is unique in that two souls “share” the same body for 9 months. As such, special considerations apply to pregnancy, especially concern for the health of the mother host. However, to argue that a fetus (or baby) has no value and thus no rights simply because it cannot live independently is wrong in my book.
By chuck
February 12, 2007 11:11 AM | Link to this
Suzie, this is the dumbest thing you have ever said on this blog:
Can this fetus with a heartbeat and SOME brain activity live independenetly outside the womb? If the answer is NO then it is not ALIVE. If it is not alive, therefore there can not be any form of KILLING, (murder).
My mother is an invalid. She has to be fed and cared for. If I put a gun to her head or better yet, maybe I could do what the abortionists do and poke a hole in her skull and suck out her brains. Would this be MURDER Suzie?
What about a 2-year-old Suzie? They can’t exist outside the womb either without being fed and taken care of? By your definition we should be able to kill children up to the age of about 6-7. Maybe if they are that old, they would be “viable”.
And I love this from ABS:
In 1992, eight days before the election, my husband, two year old son and myself went to a rally in Huntsville, AL where Al Gore was speaking. There were anti-abortion protestors present with huge color posters with the very disturbing image of aborted fetuses (sp?) with the word “Gore” written under them. To me….that is terrorism, plain and simple.
I love your definition of terrorism. Any speech that doesn’t agree with yours is terrorism. I thought you lefties were all in favor of free speech. I guess I was wrong.
Brian Curtis. See you next week you weenie.
By Lily Toad
February 12, 2007 11:14 AM | Link to this
When I first read this topic in the paper yesterday, I immediately thought of the crosses representing the American war dead in Iraq, that had been planted by anti-war activists in Crawford, Texas last summer. A local man ran over the crosses because they offended him. I couldn’t understand why he did that because I felt it was a respectful tribute to the soldiers who had died in combat. So since I support that row of crosses, I don’t object to the Ga. Tech crosses. Diane went way off topic with her response to the question of whether pro-life demonstrations should be handled differently than other demos.
Mangled fetus pictures are disturbing, but so would pictures of mangled Iraquis or soldiers. Or pictures of any type of surgery. Who wants to see a picture of a tumor removed from an internal organ?
By K9
February 12, 2007 11:21 AM | Link to this
If it makes you feel any better, kim, a couple of kids smashed the driver’s side window on my car over the weekend. There was nothing inside worth stealing, so I figure it must have been W2W karma payback. What do you think?
P.S. The guys in Kansas may be old, but they still rocked Friday night! Did anyone here on the blog attend the show?
By K9
February 12, 2007 11:25 AM | Link to this
Lily—I’ve always wondered how many people saw a video of cosmetic surgery beforehand? Whenever I see videos of nose jobs, or even liposuction, I think “No way, Jose”. Brutal stuff, that cosmetic surgery.
By K9
February 12, 2007 11:45 AM | Link to this
Last quick shout to Chilao, then gotta run and take care of the window: Did you get a load of Shakira on the Grammy Awards Show last night??????? Smoking!!!!! Whenever a little drop of perspiration would hit her stomach, you could see it vaporize into steam, she was so hot.
By SusieHomeMaker
February 12, 2007 11:47 AM | Link to this
Not really, Susie, just trying to get to the moral root of the issue. Mara made an argument that the baby’s dependency AFTER birth was different from its dependency BEFORE birth, based on the “uniqueness” of the mother, which I don’t particularly buy into. I stated at the outset today that I believe pregnancy is unique in that two souls “share” the same body for 9 months. As such, special considerations apply to pregnancy, especially concern for the health of the mother host. However, to argue that a fetus (or baby) has no value and thus no rights simply because it cannot live independently is wrong in my book
K9 no one said the fetus has “no value” we said it was “not a human being” yet. And as stated earlier, whose morality is being considered?
By Eric
February 12, 2007 11:52 AM | Link to this
God performed the first abortion - creating this horrible planet and it’s ruling inhabitants
God performed the second abortion - flooding all the world to kill all but a hand full of thos inhabitants
God performed the third abortion - allowint the world to return to its wretched state
That is, if you believe in God at all
By Chilao
February 12, 2007 11:56 AM | Link to this
No, too bad, I missed Shakira. I don’t generally watch award shows anyway, and I was unaware they were on last night until I heard about The Dixie Chicks on the TV news this morning.
By SusieHomeMaker
February 12, 2007 11:56 AM | Link to this
My mother is an invalid. She has to be fed and cared for. If I put a gun to her head or better yet, …. poke a hole in her skull and suck out her brains.Would this be MURDER Suzie?
YES. Duh.
What about a 2-year-old Suzie? They can’t exist outside the womb either
If they are 2 years old they are out the womb or if still in the womb, it’s an elephant and not a human being.
By your definition we should be able to kill children up to the age of about 6-7. Maybe if they are that old, they would be “viable”
You deliberately choose to misinterpret what I wrote. So be it. Talk to yourself from now on — your ranting is not making any sense.
By chuck
February 12, 2007 11:58 AM | Link to this
By FreedomUSA
Anti-woman-anti-choice groups are terrorists. Terrorists should not have a right to protest anything.Abortion is not murder.All those in favor of the terrorists should be adopting all the unwanted kids we already have. or….shut the F@#$@#$ up you insane maniacs.
Crazy idea of FREEDOM, USA. I guess that freedom only extends to people who agree with YOU. And you call US EXTREMISTS.
By K9
February 12, 2007 12:07 PM | Link to this
Susie—You know I respect you, so I hope you don’t take my questioning of your position in a bad way. I agree with you that, ultimately, each person has their own individual perspective on life, their own emotions, and thus their own value system. That being said, there is still benefit in discussing our individual beliefs, if only to find out what assumptions they are based upon.
Finally, even though we all have somewhat different values , in the end we have to come up with specific, mutually agreeable laws which have to be based on something. The word “moral” comes from the Latin “more”, which refers to common customs, and by extension, common values. As such, no discussion of public policy can avoid discussions of morality.
By Heretic
February 12, 2007 12:07 PM | Link to this
Heresy, Heresy, burn that man Eric at the stake. LOL
By Betty Simms
February 12, 2007 12:07 PM | Link to this
It’s those with little resource who are shouldered with the responsibility of caring for a child, while struggling alone, who face the consequences of a child raised in poverty, in instability, in a place no one would want to call home. And these were the people getting abortions, which consequently decreased the crime rate
Wow! What absolute bs. Here is a woman advocating abortions because they drop the crime rate. Just how off base is Diane? Seems like she is saying: poor women ought to get abortions because their children will become criminals.
You know Diane, those with little resources should invest in birth control and practice safe sex, or abstinence. If women alone cannot afford a baby why do you continue to pretend that single parent motherhood is a good thing for society? If its impossible to raise a child without some kind of government assistance or alimony check why do you rally for single parenthood when these nits are going to end up in prison? Betty Simms
By Monica
February 12, 2007 12:15 PM | Link to this
The regulars on here know how I feel about abortion. I’m not going to argue with everyone again as it is unproductive. For those who are new, I’m a pro-lifer, but I am not going to change the views of someone on this blog by spewing hatred in the name of Christ, so I will just abstain from comment.
As for the topic at hand, the visual protests… why should any sort of protest be held to different rules? That’s discimination, right? But who cares what the actual topic is, as long as we all get riled up about abortion? No thanks. Have a great week! :)
By chuck
February 12, 2007 12:15 PM | Link to this
Good one Pixie.
By K9
February 12, 2007 12:33 PM | Link to this
Chilao—Be sure to catch the rerun of the Grammy Awards for the Shakira segment. Not a lot of other noteworthy performances. John Mayer was good, but Ludacris just didn’t do it for me. The Dixie Chicks (or a least Nathalie) made complete asses of themselves on stage. Nathalie could only manage a “Nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah” in response to the fans. What a loser.
By chuck
February 12, 2007 12:35 PM | Link to this
Now Diane is a sick disgusting excuse for a human being. Her argument is this:
A more realistic representation of aborted fetuses isn’t a mountain of baby shoes or a string of tiny tombstones. It’s a picture of an adult carjacker, high on crack, who winds up in our prison system.
Freakonomics author Steven Levitt found a 30 percent crime rate decline in the years following the legalization of abortion in states with a higher abortion rate. You see, the moneyed can always find a way to get an abortion. They can fly to another country or even decide to raise a child alone, knowing that financial security assures them a degree of stability
HMMMM. What an elitist pig. To imply that a poor baby is PRE-DETERMINED to end up on welfare or on death row is the height of hubris. In terms of morality, her argument sucks. Leaving her obvious lack of humanity and morality aside, the logic of her argument sucks as well. Assuming that abortion also kills babies of WELL-TO-DO MOTHERS, can we not assume that many of these babies would have grown up to start companies, to be doctors, to donate to worthy causes, etc?
Have we killed the next Einstein as WELL AS THE NEXT DAHMER?
By K9
February 12, 2007 12:42 PM | Link to this
chuck—You’re not suggesting that the Libs here are practicing a double standard when it comes to free speech, are you? And certainly none of them engage in hate speech, right?
Nope, I see nothing but tolerance for diversity.
By Kevin
February 12, 2007 12:43 PM | Link to this
Monica summed up my position better than I could so there is no need for me to comment.
This topic will be dead by 4pm today. See ya’ll next week.
By K9
February 12, 2007 12:47 PM | Link to this
Kevin—You’re a smart guy. Why don’t you take over selecting the topic for the week for W2W. D & S have been striking out lately.
By K9
February 12, 2007 12:54 PM | Link to this
Here are some potential W2W topics:
Should playing golf be considered a capital crime?
If a man speaks, and there is no woman around to correct him, is he still wrong?
By K9
February 12, 2007 12:57 PM | Link to this
Or, do power tools make an acceptable Valentine’s Day gift for a woman? How about a weight-loss book?? ; > }
By SusieHomeMaker
February 12, 2007 01:01 PM | Link to this
Finally, even though we all have somewhat different values , in the end we have to come up with specific, mutually agreeable laws which have to be based on something
Agreed. And abortion is legal in all the 50 states, (and Puerto Rico).
Should playing golf be considered a capital crime?
Not playing it but most definitely WATCHING it!! It makes me fall asleep every time!
If a man speaks, and there is no woman around to correct him, is he still wrong?
YES!!! (smile)
By 2D
February 12, 2007 01:02 PM | Link to this
K9… Men are always wrong… Men, not money, are the root of all evil… :)
By PIckUpLines?
February 12, 2007 01:02 PM | Link to this
from the Napoleon Dynamite movie:
Are you drinking one-percent(milk) because you think you’re fat
By SusieHomeMaker
February 12, 2007 01:02 PM | Link to this
Or, do power tools make an acceptable Valentine’s Day gift for a woman? How about a weight-loss book?? ; > }
If you wanna live to see your next birthday, I’d burn that book.
By K9
February 12, 2007 01:10 PM | Link to this
You’re my girl, Susie. Big W2W smooch to you!
By K9
February 12, 2007 01:12 PM | Link to this
Of course, you didn’t wait to hear what diet plan I had in mind for you Susie. After all, there is more than one way to burn calories, you know. ; > }
By K9
February 12, 2007 01:14 PM | Link to this
And whenever Jack logs back in, I’m going to agree with him that 2D is a woman. S/he seemed to get miffed when I pegged her/him as a man.
By DumbAssLiberal
February 12, 2007 01:31 PM | Link to this
Since the vast majority of abortions are performed on middle class whites, poverty has no place in this argument. Abortion should only be legal when coupled with a suicide.
By Nikita
February 12, 2007 01:37 PM | Link to this
The actual precedes the potential. And a woman’s rights precede that of the entity she is hosting until such time as it stops requiring her physical sustenance. This is an imposition upon the woman, and therefore it is the woman’s decision to enter into or continue it.
As to the topic, there is a fine line between protesting and rabble rousing for economic or strategic gain as groups like the Westover Baptist group do. Legally they are indistinguishable. However, thanks to the Bush administration’s redefining the rules of protest, such “protests” can now be limited from being disruptive.
Also, the argument about potential is ridiculous, as is the misconstruction of diane’s comment about freakonomics. I happen to know a polysubstance abuser who dropped out of high school and most recently worked as a stripper — though she hasn’t worked in years. She also has issues with manic depression. She has two children and their futures aren’t bright, what with being moved all over the place, taken out with thir mother to “party” and in all likelihood abused. Likewise I do a great deal of volunteer work with children in foster care. Those children often have the deck stacked against them from birth, lacking stable families, safe environments, consistent education, a support system, or even adequate government benefits to substitute for the lack of resources that their natural families should have provided to them. As a result, i feel strongly that women must be able to control their procreation, and must be supported in the decision to have children when they want to (or not) and in the most optimal conditions. Finally, I think reproductive choices are desperately important for women because women must be able to be taken on their own merits, rather than forced to sacrifice their personal potential in order to raise children that they do not wish to raise.
By GOB
February 12, 2007 02:08 PM | Link to this
Chuck - Do you really think that those with money will be impacted in a real way if abortion is outlawed in the US? Whether you are happy about it or not, the real result would be that those women who have the least ability to care for a child will be the ones who are now forced to do just that.
Obviously noone is saying that any poor baby will become a crackhead, but the statistics are there and are very clear. If you are born into poverty, you are much more likely to remain there, and also much more likely to end up on the wrong side of the law at some point. Removing options would not help this country in any way.
By Simple
February 12, 2007 02:15 PM | Link to this
Against Abortion? Then don’t have one! Ta Dah!
By Mara
February 12, 2007 02:15 PM | Link to this
Mara made an argument that the baby’s dependency AFTER birth was different from its dependency BEFORE birth, based on the “uniqueness” of the mother
I did make the point about a fetus being fused to the body of the mother( okay to the womb…)and a baby being a seperate entity. I was commenting on the FACT that while a baby can survive anywhere so long as it gets fed and cared for by something or someone, a fetus is only able to survive via the uterus it originally implanted on. If that’s what the mutt meant by my basing my point on the “uniqueness” of the mother, er..I mean the womb, then fine. But as SusieHM said, he’s picking hair on a gorilla’s butt.
and by the bye, IMHO anyone who gestates a fetus has the right to be called “mother” if she wants to be. Any woman who gives birth to a baby, IS a mother regardless. She may end up being a bad mother, but she’s still a mother. As is any woman who takes a child into their heart and cares for it as if she did have the birthing of it.
what a boring and pointless blog this has turned into.
By fixtheproblem
February 12, 2007 02:16 PM | Link to this
I am for selective abortion…let me select who should be allowed to reproduce…In Atlanta is seems to be the ghetto trash..THE LAST THING WE NEED MORE OF!
By chuck
February 12, 2007 02:26 PM | Link to this
So Nikita, in your opinion Women ARE STUPID?
As a result, i feel strongly that women must be able to control their procreation
So these women who are not even smart enough to avoid PREGNANCY, should be:
supported in the decision to have children when they want to (or not)
You see, in your estimation, women could not possibly be very smart if they can be:
forced to sacrifice their personal potential in order to raise children that they do not wish to raise.
Did your mother sacrifice her personal potential by giving birth to you? I would suspect that all of you PRO-ABORTION folks would have more respect for women, thinking them to be capable of PROACTIVE steps to PREVENT pregnancy rather than being REACTIVE once the deed is done.
Are women then unworthy (knowing all that we know) of being trusted with the act of reproduction since they seem to be incapable of figuring out how to AVOID pregnancy? After all how can we take women on their own merits lacking this one simple ability?
This is about personal responsibility. Once you have a baby, it is too late to worry about choice…the choice has been made. I am perfectly willing to give women power over their OWN BODIES. I am not willing to give them the choice to obliterate a BABY because it may be inconvenient.
By K9
February 12, 2007 02:46 PM | Link to this
The truth is that abortion is a procedure of convenience in which a life is lost. I’m not for outlawing abortion, but let’s call a spade a spade.
By chuck
February 12, 2007 02:53 PM | Link to this
I did make the point about a fetus being fused to the body of the mother( okay to the womb…)and a baby being a seperate entity.
So Mara, abortion is NOT about the right of the mother to do what she will with HER body, but rather to KILL SOMEONE ELSE’S BODY. Interesting. I thought you pro-abortionists considered the BABY to be just a glob of “tissue” inside the MOTHER’s body. Good to know that you are aware that the Baby is a SEPARATE ENTITY. I thought in this country we did not go around killing OTHER people.
By K9
February 12, 2007 02:56 PM | Link to this
Mara—Out of curiosity (hypothetical moral question for you), if a woman agreed to be a Surrogate Mother, is the decision to abort still hers and hers alone? This question assumes that the health and safety of the Surrogate Mother aren’t at risk.
By K9
February 12, 2007 02:58 PM | Link to this
Boy, now even John Smoltz is getting a divorce. Maybe marriage is dead as an institution.
By chuck
February 12, 2007 02:58 PM | Link to this
I’m going to have to tell my wife that she has no PERSONAL POTENTIAL. I mean after all she gave birth not once but twice!!!!! I guess that means she has (gasp) negative potential? The fact that she is a brilliant math teacher notwithstanding.
By K9
February 12, 2007 03:04 PM | Link to this
chuck, serious question about teaching: How often do students sass you, your wife, or the other teachers? I think teaching might be a good career for me, but I’m afraid I might lose my temper if some punk calls me out.
By SoStupid
February 12, 2007 03:04 PM | Link to this
Ya’ll are so friggin retarded…you are a bunch of pseudo intellects trying to debate in an anonymous blog pretending to be self righteous and smart…get a life, go out and find friends to talk to…or better yet—do some work and quit playing on the friggin internet
By K9
February 12, 2007 03:09 PM | Link to this
do some work and quit playing on the friggin internet
Well, I don’t know about you, SoStupid, but I’m under contract. I get paid by the word.
By chuck
February 12, 2007 03:12 PM | Link to this
UHHH, sostupid, your moniker says it all.
K9, depends on the school. As you may know, I have a tendency to be a little sarcastic. Since I tend to be that way, I don’t mind it so much from my kids. If it’s downright disrespect, that’s a different thing. I don’t do that to my kids and they know better than to do that to me. In my school it doesn’t happen very often. In my Wife’s school, it is a way of life. They deal with it in a professional way.
By Freedom USA
February 12, 2007 03:13 PM | Link to this
OK Chuck & all you cave people….
Give up your bone marrow right now, state imposed. After all it will save the life of a child.
Give up your blood on a regular basis. You have no choice because it will save children.
Give up a kidney, right now state imposed after all it will save a child.
Who cares if you don’t want to suffer? It’s not about you it’s about other people !
After that, we’re dumping 12 unwanted children off at YOUR house. Sorry you’ll have to pay for it on your own & raise them yourself. YOU ASKED for it.
By huh?
February 12, 2007 03:17 PM | Link to this
abortion is NOT about the right of the mother to do what she will with HER body, but rather to KILL SOMEONE ELSE’S BODY.
Ok so if it causes her to have a life time of diabetes then tough beans right? That doesn’t matter.
And what body are you talking about? The clump of undeveloped cells body? How nice I want to be forced to grow cells.
This country can’t get men to pay for the kids they create & you want to force us to grow cells?
By Chilao
February 12, 2007 03:17 PM | Link to this
SoStupid - how on earth did you find this blog, having such a full life AND being so busy at work and all as well?
youra slippin, slippin’ ya aar.
do we really sound like intellects, let alone psuedo ones? LMAO
By K9
February 12, 2007 03:19 PM | Link to this
I’ll probably volunteer as a substitute teacher over at Ghettocreek, oops, I mean Meadowcreek High School since it is right around the corner from my house. That should be a nice intro to the “real world” of teaching.
By chuck
February 12, 2007 03:20 PM | Link to this
Hmmmmm. “FreedomUSA” you are the one in favor of killing babies and I’m a “caveman”?
I AM on the bone marrow list.
I do give blood regularly.
Underthe right circumstances I would give one of my kidneys up.
If I need to, I’ll take as many children as I can. Right now, I already support many efforts to feed, clothe and educate children, including raising funds for an orphanage for disabled children in Romania, as well as contributing regularly to local food bank efforts.
By kimberly
February 12, 2007 03:22 PM | Link to this
Chuck, I’ve sacrificed more than potential. Heh… But I do it because it was MY CHOICE. Had I been forced to do what I’ve done, forced to endure the humiliating and unkind remarks from good “conservative” people, forced to hand over my body against my will for all those months, forced to settle for lesser career aspirations and less money, and no time for my own personal pursuits, I might feel differently. As it is now, on days when my frustration is high, my patience is gone, and I feel like the most UN-appreciated person on the planet, I can deal, because I know I made my choice and directed my own path. That’s the difference between being a victim and being responsible: self-determination.
By chuck
February 12, 2007 03:23 PM | Link to this
huh? You know less about anatomy than you do about abortion. Crawl back in your hole and try to sleep it off.
By chuck
February 12, 2007 03:24 PM | Link to this
Hey Chilao, he/she obviously has very little experience with intellects…pseudo or otherwise.
By K9
February 12, 2007 03:25 PM | Link to this
I think I could make it as a professional poker player, but there’s a big downside spiritually to gambling for a living, in my book. All of the pros I’ve met have some serious personality disorders. I mean, way worse than me, if you can believe that.
By K9
February 12, 2007 03:30 PM | Link to this
kimberly, out of curiosity, was it always your dream to have kids and be a Mom? You sound very regretful about the career opportunities you’ve lost being as a Mom.
P.S. I was very impressed to know that you ski. I was lucky enough to spend a week in Snowmass, Colorado once. It’s just outside of Aspen.
By K9
February 12, 2007 03:31 PM | Link to this
And please don’t feel unappreciated, kimberly. You are.
By SusieHomeMaker
February 12, 2007 03:32 PM | Link to this
The truth is that abortion is a procedure of convenience in which a life is lost. I’m not for outlawing abortion, but let’s call a spade a spade
K9: You act like no thought goes into this for the woman who’s having the abortion; nor for her partner. You’re talking like she gets up one morning and says, “Dang, I’m pregnant, I guess I’ll go have an abortion.” without giving serious thoughts to the after effects of the act.
Most women grapple with the decision for days and weeks before finally coming to the conclusion that an abortion is the right thing to do for them, their partner, and the would-be CHILD if it’s brought into the world. It’s not a matter of convenience for most, it’s a matter of reality.
Have you ever read the book by Toni Morrison, “Beloved”? In the book, (and this is based on a true story), a mother kills one girl child and tries to kill the other so that they wouldn’t be brought up into slavery; having been brought up as a female in the institution herself, she’d rather her girl children were DEAD then female slaves.
The act that the heroine, Sethe, in the book and the real life heroine, Margaret Garner, were condemned for their act but they felt in their hearts that they did the right thing.
When a woman goes for an abortion she feels in her heart she is doing the right thing, not just for herself but for the woudl-be CHILD that would be forced to live in her world.
By K9
February 12, 2007 03:42 PM | Link to this
Most women grapple with the decision for days and weeks before finally coming to the conclusion that an abortion is the right thing to do for them, their partner, and the would-be CHILD if it’s brought into the world.
Susie, I believe you. Despite popular opinion on the W2W blog, I am an extremely compassionate person and feel deeply for anyone in trouble. The only part I strongly disagree with is when you speak of what is best for the “would-be CHILD”. It’s hard to see how premature death could be the best choice from the child’s point of view.
I didn’t read “Beloved”, but am very familiar with the plot. Toni Morrison’s writing style is not my cup of tea, it’s too hard for a cracker like me to follow. I don’t shy away from “ethnic” books, however. “The Invisible Man” made a powerful impression on me as a teen.
By chuck
February 12, 2007 03:44 PM | Link to this
Kimberly, I don’t doubt your passion for one instant. If you look at it from my perspective, then you’ll understand that EVERY WOMAN makes that same choice. I’m all in favor of choice. It just needs to be exercised BEFORE there is a Baby.
Obviously women are stupid. Present company excluded Kim, because according to LIBERALS, women are incapable of avoiding pregnancy. Could not do if they wanted to.
I RESPECT women. I think they are SMART enough to figure out what causes pregnancy and if they don’t want to have a Baby, they will AVOID getting pregnant. Such a simple philosophy…yet PROFOUND.
By K9
February 12, 2007 03:48 PM | Link to this
Out of curiosity, Susie, since “Beloved” raises the point about “what is best for the child”, do you personally think Sethe did the “right thing” by killing her children? I understand that her emotions led her to believe that. In the novel, if I am correct, slavery is ended when the heroine has her flashbacks. Would knowledge of the imminent end of slavery have changed her decision?
I have killed animals in the past that were severely injured to end their suffering (e.g a groundhog which was run over and flailing about), but even then had strong moral qualms about doing it.
By Jack
February 12, 2007 03:53 PM | Link to this
Mmmmmmmmm. All this talk is making me hungry for baby wraps & stew!
By K9
February 12, 2007 03:54 PM | Link to this
Fess up, chuck. If you were single, wouldn’t you be interested in kimberly? She knows how to get men’s attention, no doubt.
By chuck
February 12, 2007 03:54 PM | Link to this
K9, you are barking up the wrong tree. They care MORE about that groundhog than they do a “potential” Baby. They wanted those boys that tortured that dog to get 90 YEARS IN PRISON, but give a total pass to a doctor who takes a Baby almost out of the womb, pokes a hole through its skull and sucks its brains out.
Sick, disgusting, excrement.
By kimberly
February 12, 2007 03:56 PM | Link to this
Chuck, yet clearly you do not UNDERSTAND women. Avoiding pregnancy is much trickier than you presume, not having an ovulatory cycle of your own. Precautions of every sort do fail. And physical barriers placed between swimmers and eggs comprise only a part of the big, complex social and emotional arena in which fertilizations take place. Furthermore, God did not make every person “SMART,” or as a teacher, did you fail to notice the intellectual discrepancies among the population? D’OH!
By K9
February 12, 2007 04:00 PM | Link to this
I know if jack were single, he’d be all over kim. She might even agree to meet him for a cup of coffee!! I’m jealous.
By SusieHomeMaker
February 12, 2007 04:00 PM | Link to this
The only part I strongly disagree with is when you speak of what is best for the “would-be CHILD”. It’s hard to see how premature death could be the best choice from the child’s point of view
This is where we differ. It’s not a premature death if there never was a birth.
I didn’t read “Beloved”, but am very familiar with the plot. Toni Morrison’s writing style is not my cup of tea, it’s too hard for a cracker like me to follow
Toni Morrison is hard to read for me to. Mainly because the majority of her books are so SAD. I’m a pretty “light” person, hey I LIKE happy endings!! But her books deal a lot with black women’s issues that were prevalent in her time and still prevalent today. She writes about how society sees uglyness in “blackness” and how a lot of black female children feel unloved and unappreciated because they don’t have blue eyes, blonde hair, and fair skin. She writes about a black woman’s search for love — love for herself and love from others, and how that search destroys her soul when the search goes awry.
On this blog someone mentioned about women having a lot of unwanted children and blah blah blah. I wonder if they even thought about that a lot of poor, black women have children because they feel that’s the only way to find LOVE. A child loves you unconditionally — no matter if you’re the world’s best mother or the world’s worst. If you’ve ever been made to feel less, (Less than your female counterpart because your hair is too nappy or you skin is too dark), feel your contributions in society are worthless, (not just from “the media” per se, but from Black Males too), if everyone blames YOU for the drug problems in the inner city, for crime rates, for single parenthood, (when, if given a choice, i bet a LOT of black women would gladly marry the father of their children), they blame YOU for the socio-economic battlefield; etc.— wouldn’t you search for a spark of love from somewhere? Some women make the mistake of mistaking sex for love; and when they find out it’s just sex, it’s too late — they’re already in love.
But I digress, the reason why you probably can’t get into Toni Morrison is that she writes more from the Black Woman’s perspective — and it’s not always pretty, and it’s not always happy. Not everyone has a taste for the blues.
By mybodymylife
February 12, 2007 04:02 PM | Link to this
It’s about the woman. End of story. Not everybody wants a house full of screaming kids. Not everybody thinks raising kids is the end-all-be-all fun for all. It’s a lot of work & not everybody thinks it’s a good idea. If a woman doesn’t want to do all that work then that’s a very good reason. That “convenience” line is a bunch of crap. Women get to decide their own quality of life & a LOT of women don’t think kids makes a quality life. Like women aren’t supposed to have a quality of life that THEY see fit, not everybody’s else’s idea of what we’re supposed want to do.
And for all you people that spout the “well she had a choice before she got pregnant”. you can F@#$ off. You want to punish women for having sex. I have nothing to say to people like you.
By K9
February 12, 2007 04:04 PM | Link to this
I guess I’m lucky, then, kim. My “swinners” are lazy, they don’t swim very far before tiring out. There is a technical term for it, “sperm agglutinization”. I’ve read that it can be “cured” by switching to boxer shorts, but, hey, why mess up a good thing?
By K9
February 12, 2007 04:06 PM | Link to this
I’m starting to wonder if kim’s real love interest isn’t chuck after all. She seems to reserve most of her attention for him.
By SusieHomeMaker
February 12, 2007 04:06 PM | Link to this
Out of curiosity, Susie, since “Beloved” raises the point about “what is best for the child”, do you personally think Sethe did the “right thing” by killing her children?
I do. Remember she was a black WOMAN who was brought up in slavery. In the novel, Sethe was brought on the farm at age 12 or 13 to be the “mistress” of the other slaves, (some 3x her age), because the only other female slave on the plantation was too old to service all the men. Not only was Sethe supposed to service the black male slaes, but the white landowners and whoever else wanted her too. I would’ve rather my girlchild be DEAD then live a life like that — brood mares are treated better.
In the novel, if I am correct, slavery is ended when the heroine has her flashbacks. Would knowledge of the imminent end of slavery have changed her decision?
Sethe killed her children when the slave master was on his way to bring her BACK into slavery, (at the time Sethe has escaped slavery and was living in Ohio as a free woman). Even though one of her daughters was born in Ohio, at that time it made no difference, if you were born of a slave, you were a slave.
By K9
February 12, 2007 04:10 PM | Link to this
he writes about how society sees uglyness in “blackness” and how a lot of black female children feel unloved and unappreciated because they don’t have blue eyes, blonde hair, and fair skin. She writes about a black woman’s search for love
Wow, that is very moving, Susie. To be honest, I didn’t look at it that way, I have learned something today from you, I am very grateful. That saddens me to think a black woman would feel inferior for not having the blue eyes, etc. I did notice in my years of working in the ‘hood that the “redbone” black women always seemed to be very proud of that fact.
By K9
February 12, 2007 04:15 PM | Link to this
Another thought provoking book as a teen was “Huckleberry Finn”. Although by today’s standards the book may seem racist in some ways, Samuel Clemens was progressive for his day in portraying “Jim” the slave as a full human being, worthy of equal respect as any other person.
By kimberly
February 12, 2007 04:16 PM | Link to this
Susie, GREAT points that are (not suprisingly) overlooked by the “compassionate conservatives.” They reinforce the “darned if you do, darned if you don’t” principle that is the very essence of womanhood. Ask them if they’ve considered those aspects of the issue, and they’ll go back to the generic, bottled shouting points from their little church pamphlets. Compassion, my a—.
By mybodymylife
February 12, 2007 04:22 PM | Link to this
Chuck, too bad if you don’t have enough to support any more of these kids & whatever you say you pay for. You want to create unlimited forced births?, YOU DEAL WITH THE CONSIQUENCES.
I’ts not about you, you have no right to your own life.
By K9
February 12, 2007 04:23 PM | Link to this
No doggy treats for K9 today, kim?
By SusieHomeMaker
February 12, 2007 04:24 PM | Link to this
K9: It’s not ALL black women who feel that way or who are brought up to feel that way, but it’s just a perspective on the way Toni Morrison writes her books. But there are a LOT of times when the world “welfare” is mentioned people automatically picture a black woman. When in reality in statistic after statistic it is shown that white women use welfare more than blacks. It’s just the way it is. Being the “blame” for all of societies ills gets old and wearing after a while. Being the sole carrier of the whole black race on your shoulders gets to be a burdon.
The other day, I was waiting on my kids to get out of school, and I saw this little kid, (about 3 or 4) running around through the cars, etc. (the other parents were trying to catch him), and the first thing someone said is “Where is his mother?!!” I wonder why no one ever asks “Where is his father?”
By K9
February 12, 2007 04:26 PM | Link to this
and they’ll go back to the generic, bottled shouting points from their little church pamphlets. Compassion, my a—.
Yep, she’s hot for chuck, there’s no doubt.
By K9
February 12, 2007 04:28 PM | Link to this
Susie—Not to single out black men, but what is up with the attitude that it is great to have several children out of wedlock? A lot of “brothers” seem to be proud of that.
By K9
February 12, 2007 04:31 PM | Link to this
I bet Susie is a “redbone”. ; > }
Just kidding, Susie. I did go to a very interesting poker tourney last week, however. I was one of two white guys, along with 14 very scary looking brothers. There was so much jewelry in the room I started worrying about a robbery. You had the feeling not to ask some of the guys what they did for a living.
By SusieHomeMaker
February 12, 2007 04:31 PM | Link to this
oops please excuse all of Susie’s bad spelling errors!!! typing fast and hitting “send” too quickly.
By SusieHomeMaker
February 12, 2007 04:35 PM | Link to this
K9: My co-worker, white guy, has THREE EX WIVES; and 2 kids from each!!! He drives a Corvette, eats lunch out everday; and wears expensive colonge and clothes. Now, Susie may be a cynic, but I don’t think he’s “current” with his child support!!! He’s a serial monogamist who just like to hit it and quit it. This is not necessarily a “black male” problem……..
By K9
February 12, 2007 04:36 PM | Link to this
Well, i take back anything bad i said about illegal immigrants, at least for today. Mi amigo Juan sent two of his pendejos over pronto to fix my car window.
If I get credit for one smart thing, it would be for learning Spanish several years ago. Mucho mejor precios quando puedes hablar Espanol.
By SusieHomeMaker
February 12, 2007 04:39 PM | Link to this
K9: All brothers, except Bill Cosby, are “scary” to white guys!! And Susie is milk chocolate….easy on the tongue.
Just Kidding!! Tell your wife you’re safe, I’m not jockeying after ya! I grew up in a “multi-cultural” family. My youngest neice has chocolate parents and she has blonde hair and hazel eyes. Genetics will get you every time!!!
By K9
February 12, 2007 04:39 PM | Link to this
For your Valentine’s gift this year, Susie, how about instead of jewelry, I pay your salary for a week so you can take off and relax at home?
By K9
February 12, 2007 04:42 PM | Link to this
And Susie is milk chocolate….easy on the tongue.
OMG!!!!!! You made my day, Susie. No wife to worry about, though. I ran her off years ago.
By SusieHomeMaker
February 12, 2007 04:42 PM | Link to this
On that note, Susie will say adios for today. See you tomorrow!!
By K9
February 12, 2007 04:43 PM | Link to this
*K9: All brothers, except Bill Cosby, are “scary” to white guys!! *
That’s generally not true, Susie, for me at least. I’m always one of a few token whites at this particular game. There were just a lot of new players, and they would have scared even Mike Tyson.
By K9
February 12, 2007 04:48 PM | Link to this
But let me sing some Stevie Wonder for you, Susie dear:
Everybody’s got a thing But some don’t know how to handle it Always reachin’ out in vain Accepting the things not worth having
Don’t you worry ‘bout a thing Don’t you worry ‘bout a thing, mama Cause I’ll be standing on the side When you check it out
By Nikita
February 12, 2007 05:04 PM | Link to this
So Nikita, in your opinion Women ARE STUPID?
Nope. Lives are complicated. Access to birth control is inconsistent, women are exploited, and then of course things happen. You’re also assuming with your argument that those of us who support the right to privacy and to one’s own self-determination don’t support other steps — I completely support any measure which would reduce the number of children born to people who aren’t capable of caring for them and who choose not to have them.
Did your mother sacrifice her personal potential by giving birth to you? I would suspect that all of you PRO-ABORTION folks would have more respect for women, thinking them to be capable of PROACTIVE steps to PREVENT pregnancy rather than being REACTIVE once the deed is done.
Two things here.
Yes, my mother did sacrifice some portion of her personal potential in order to have and raise me. She paid a great deal to have infertility issues addressed, and she was my primary caregiver. She chose that — I would not favor any woman being forced to do that.
As for “respect for women,” I have an infinite amount of respect for women. You, however, don’t respect women to make their own medical decisions. How paternalistic is that?
Once you have a baby, it is too late to worry about choice…the choice has been made. I am perfectly willing to give women power over their OWN BODIES. I am not willing to give them the choice to obliterate a BABY because it may be inconvenient.
Once you have a blastocyst, you don’t even know if it will become a baby. What’s God got against blastocysts that he apparently causes so many of them not to come to fruition? So…there’s an issue right there. And anything within my body and dependent upon my choices is my body. I make decisions about how best to treat my body, as do you. As it should be.
By whenwhenwhen
February 12, 2007 05:52 PM | Link to this
Does anybody here think that one day the world will stop being obsessed so much about what women are doing, wearing, talking to, working & where, what they’re saying, what they shouldn’t be saying, acting, walking, marrying, having kids, no kids, too many kids, where they choose to work & how much to pay them, how sexy they are or aren’t, how fat, thin, short, tall, loud, quiet, whatever??????????
When will the Vaginia-Uterous obsession end? When will all the sex double standards end? When will the world realize how important there be safe & affective birth control avail for all women as soon as they are able to get pregnant???????
When will the religious nuts back off & leave women alone??????
By ultram95444
February 12, 2007 08:59 PM | Link to this
Tramadol is usually marketed as the hydrochloride salt (tramadol hydrochloride) and is available in both injectable (intravenous and/or intramuscular) and oral preparations (e.g. Zydol® in UK and Ultram® in US). It is also available in conjunction with paracetamol (acetaminophen) as Ultracet® or Tramacet®. http://lkdfgiwks.110mb.com/index.html >ultram [url= http://lkdfgiwks.110mb.com/index.html ]ultram[/url] http://lkdfgiwks.110mb.com/index.html ultram
By cancelli blindati
February 13, 2007 05:23 AM | Link to this
cancelli blindati http://big-trouble.guxede.info/la-meridiana/ la meridiana big-trouble.guxede.info/la-meridiana/ la meridiana la meridiana la meridiana http://deltabas.ibelgique.com/images/small/kilpi-volter/ kilpi, volter deltabas.ibelgique.com/images/small/kilpi-volter/ kilpi, volter kilpi, volter kilpi, volter http://lione-per.guxede.info/la-vie/ la vie en rosa lione-per.guxede.info/la-vie/ la vie en rosa la vie en rosa la vie en rosa http://medjugorie.zidope.info/www-stranezze/ www stranezze com medjugorie.zidope.info/www-stranezze/ www stranezze com www stranezze com www stranezze com http://luka-tom.guxede.info/lesbian-girls/ lesbian girls photos luka-tom.guxede.info/lesbian-girls/ lesbian girls photos lesbian girls photos lesbian girls photos http://la-sinceridad.dysycadixa.info/lady-ragga/ lady ragga come and get it la-sinceridad.dysycadixa.info/lady-ragga/ lady ragga come and get it lady ragga come and get it lady ragga come and get it http://viacco.ibelgique.com/images/small/cooking-games/ cooking games viacco.ibelgique.com/images/small/cooking-games/ cooking games cooking games cooking games http://rolbecli.ifrance.com/img/styles/cancelli-blindati.htm cancelli blindati rolbecli.ifrance.com/img/styles/cancelli-blindati.htm cancelli blindati cancelli blindati cancelli blindati
By cancelli blindati
February 13, 2007 05:24 AM | Link to this
cancelli blindati http://big-trouble.guxede.info/la-meridiana/ la meridiana big-trouble.guxede.info/la-meridiana/ la meridiana la meridiana la meridiana http://deltabas.ibelgique.com/images/small/kilpi-volter/ kilpi, volter deltabas.ibelgique.com/images/small/kilpi-volter/ kilpi, volter kilpi, volter kilpi, volter http://lione-per.guxede.info/la-vie/ la vie en rosa lione-per.guxede.info/la-vie/ la vie en rosa la vie en rosa la vie en rosa http://medjugorie.zidope.info/www-stranezze/ www stranezze com medjugorie.zidope.info/www-stranezze/ www stranezze com www stranezze com www stranezze com http://luka-tom.guxede.info/lesbian-girls/ lesbian girls photos luka-tom.guxede.info/lesbian-girls/ lesbian girls photos lesbian girls photos lesbian girls photos http://la-sinceridad.dysycadixa.info/lady-ragga/ lady ragga come and get it la-sinceridad.dysycadixa.info/lady-ragga/ lady ragga come and get it lady ragga come and get it lady ragga come and get it http://viacco.ibelgique.com/images/small/cooking-games/ cooking games viacco.ibelgique.com/images/small/cooking-games/ cooking games cooking games cooking games http://rolbecli.ifrance.com/img/styles/cancelli-blindati.htm cancelli blindati rolbecli.ifrance.com/img/styles/cancelli-blindati.htm cancelli blindati cancelli blindati cancelli blindati
By cancelli blindati
February 13, 2007 05:24 AM | Link to this
cancelli blindati http://big-trouble.guxede.info/la-meridiana/ la meridiana big-trouble.guxede.info/la-meridiana/ la meridiana la meridiana la meridiana http://deltabas.ibelgique.com/images/small/kilpi-volter/ kilpi, volter deltabas.ibelgique.com/images/small/kilpi-volter/ kilpi, volter kilpi, volter kilpi, volter http://lione-per.guxede.info/la-vie/ la vie en rosa lione-per.guxede.info/la-vie/ la vie en rosa la vie en rosa la vie en rosa http://medjugorie.zidope.info/www-stranezze/ www stranezze com medjugorie.zidope.info/www-stranezze/ www stranezze com www stranezze com www stranezze com http://luka-tom.guxede.info/lesbian-girls/ lesbian girls photos luka-tom.guxede.info/lesbian-girls/ lesbian girls photos lesbian girls photos lesbian girls photos http://la-sinceridad.dysycadixa.info/lady-ragga/ lady ragga come and get it la-sinceridad.dysycadixa.info/lady-ragga/ lady ragga come and get it lady ragga come and get it lady ragga come and get it http://viacco.ibelgique.com/images/small/cooking-games/ cooking games viacco.ibelgique.com/images/small/cooking-games/ cooking games cooking games cooking games http://rolbecli.ifrance.com/img/styles/cancelli-blindati.htm cancelli blindati rolbecli.ifrance.com/img/styles/cancelli-blindati.htm cancelli blindati cancelli blindati cancelli blindati
By cancelli blindati
February 13, 2007 05:25 AM | Link to this
cancelli blindati http://big-trouble.guxede.info/la-meridiana/ la meridiana big-trouble.guxede.info/la-meridiana/ la meridiana la meridiana la meridiana http://deltabas.ibelgique.com/images/small/kilpi-volter/ kilpi, volter deltabas.ibelgique.com/images/small/kilpi-volter/ kilpi, volter kilpi, volter kilpi, volter http://lione-per.guxede.info/la-vie/ la vie en rosa lione-per.guxede.info/la-vie/ la vie en rosa la vie en rosa la vie en rosa http://medjugorie.zidope.info/www-stranezze/ www stranezze com medjugorie.zidope.info/www-stranezze/ www stranezze com www stranezze com www stranezze com http://luka-tom.guxede.info/lesbian-girls/ lesbian girls photos luka-tom.guxede.info/lesbian-girls/ lesbian girls photos lesbian girls photos lesbian girls photos http://la-sinceridad.dysycadixa.info/lady-ragga/ lady ragga come and get it la-sinceridad.dysycadixa.info/lady-ragga/ lady ragga come and get it lady ragga come and get it lady ragga come and get it http://viacco.ibelgique.com/images/small/cooking-games/ cooking games viacco.ibelgique.com/images/small/cooking-games/ cooking games cooking games cooking games http://rolbecli.ifrance.com/img/styles/cancelli-blindati.htm cancelli blindati rolbecli.ifrance.com/img/styles/cancelli-blindati.htm cancelli blindati cancelli blindati cancelli blindati
By cancelli blindati
February 13, 2007 05:27 AM | Link to this
cancelli blindati http://big-trouble.guxede.info/la-meridiana/ la meridiana big-trouble.guxede.info/la-meridiana/ la meridiana la meridiana la meridiana http://deltabas.ibelgique.com/images/small/kilpi-volter/ kilpi, volter deltabas.ibelgique.com/images/small/kilpi-volter/ kilpi, volter kilpi, volter kilpi, volter http://lione-per.guxede.info/la-vie/ la vie en rosa lione-per.guxede.info/la-vie/ la vie en rosa la vie en rosa la vie en rosa http://medjugorie.zidope.info/www-stranezze/ www stranezze com medjugorie.zidope.info/www-stranezze/ www stranezze com www stranezze com www stranezze com http://luka-tom.guxede.info/lesbian-girls/ lesbian girls photos luka-tom.guxede.info/lesbian-girls/ lesbian girls photos lesbian girls photos lesbian girls photos http://la-sinceridad.dysycadixa.info/lady-ragga/ lady ragga come and get it la-sinceridad.dysycadixa.info/lady-ragga/ lady ragga come and get it lady ragga come and get it lady ragga come and get it http://viacco.ibelgique.com/images/small/cooking-games/ cooking games viacco.ibelgique.com/images/small/cooking-games/ cooking games cooking games cooking games http://rolbecli.ifrance.com/img/styles/cancelli-blindati.htm cancelli blindati rolbecli.ifrance.com/img/styles/cancelli-blindati.htm cancelli blindati cancelli blindati cancelli blindati
By miami sound machine
February 13, 2007 05:27 AM | Link to this
miami sound machine http://meldommon.ifrance.com/img/styles/cooperativa-azzurra.htm cooperativa azzurra cuneo meldommon.ifrance.com/img/styles/cooperativa-azzurra.htm cooperativa azzurra cuneo cooperativa azzurra cuneo cooperativa azzurra cuneo http://meldommon.ifrance.com/img/styles/gioco-carte.htm gioco carte solitario meldommon.ifrance.com/img/styles/gioco-carte.htm gioco carte solitario gioco carte solitario gioco carte solitario http://olodelweq.ibelgique.com/images/small/le-casino/ le casino olodelweq.ibelgique.com/images/small/le-casino/ le casino le casino le casino http://my-way.zukocele.info/miami-sound/ miami sound machine my-way.zukocele.info/miami-sound/ miami sound machine miami sound machine miami sound machine
By miami sound machine
February 13, 2007 05:28 AM | Link to this
miami sound machine http://meldommon.ifrance.com/img/styles/cooperativa-azzurra.htm cooperativa azzurra cuneo meldommon.ifrance.com/img/styles/cooperativa-azzurra.htm cooperativa azzurra cuneo cooperativa azzurra cuneo cooperativa azzurra cuneo http://meldommon.ifrance.com/img/styles/gioco-carte.htm gioco carte solitario meldommon.ifrance.com/img/styles/gioco-carte.htm gioco carte solitario gioco carte solitario gioco carte solitario http://olodelweq.ibelgique.com/images/small/le-casino/ le casino olodelweq.ibelgique.com/images/small/le-casino/ le casino le casino le casino http://my-way.zukocele.info/miami-sound/ miami sound machine my-way.zukocele.info/miami-sound/ miami sound machine miami sound machine miami sound machine
By miami sound machine
February 13, 2007 05:28 AM | Link to this
miami sound machine http://meldommon.ifrance.com/img/styles/cooperativa-azzurra.htm cooperativa azzurra cuneo meldommon.ifrance.com/img/styles/cooperativa-azzurra.htm cooperativa azzurra cuneo cooperativa azzurra cuneo cooperativa azzurra cuneo http://meldommon.ifrance.com/img/styles/gioco-carte.htm gioco carte solitario meldommon.ifrance.com/img/styles/gioco-carte.htm gioco carte solitario gioco carte solitario gioco carte solitario http://olodelweq.ibelgique.com/images/small/le-casino/ le casino olodelweq.ibelgique.com/images/small/le-casino/ le casino le casino le casino http://my-way.zukocele.info/miami-sound/ miami sound machine my-way.zukocele.info/miami-sound/ miami sound machine miami sound machine miami sound machine
By xxx
February 13, 2007 08:36 AM | Link to this
http://rapes.1fasttimesatnau.info >rapes - http://hairyerotica.1fasttimesatnau.info >hairyerotica - http://little-f***.1fasttimesatnau.info >little f*** - http://young-shemale.1fasttimesatnau.info >young shemale - http://arabic-porn.1fasttimesatnau.info >arabic porn -
By 2D
February 13, 2007 09:01 AM | Link to this
when when when… will women realize that they have a responsibility, no an obligation, to not only themselves but to the rest of humanity to care and protect themesleves.
Like it or not, women are different than men. Women are different physically and emotionally. Women are the givers and the caretakers of life.
I agree with the women on this BLOG, and around the world, that say a woman should be able to choose if/when they want to bring new life into the world. Women should make that choice because they are the ones who are ultimately tied to and care for the new life which grows inside of them. However, the choice should not be about whether or not to end a pregnancy. The choice should be about whether or not they want to begin a pregnancy.
The woman chooses when she has sex, with whom she has sex, whether or not her male partner enters her wearing protection and whether or not she uses her own form of birth control. Unless we are discussing rape, which then the discussion in my opinion is totally different, the woman makes all of these choices. If a woman doesn’t want to get pregnant, then she should do one or more of the following depending on her specific situation: choose partners wisely, take birth control pills, don’t engage in unprotected sex, abstain from sex or abstain at least when she believes she is most fertile. Any one of these will greatly reduce the chances of an unwanted pregnancy and done in combination, these actions pretty much eliminate the chance either by eliminating the pregnancy all together or if it happens to be in a place where keeping the child is a joy.
Quite frankly, pregnancy isn’t my biggest “health” concern for women, it is catching disease. I shudder to think that a woman would let a man enter her body without precaution unless she were absolutely sure about him. I would want women to respect themselves and their health more than that. A pregnancy ends and rarely if ever does lasting damage to the woman’s body. Disease can ravage her and leave her damaged for the rest of her life.
By SusieHomeMaker
February 13, 2007 09:34 AM | Link to this
Quite frankly, pregnancy isn’t my biggest “health” concern for women, it is catching disease. I shudder to think that a woman would let a man enter her body without precaution unless she were absolutely sure about him. I would want women to respect themselves and their health more than that. A pregnancy ends and rarely if ever does lasting damage to the woman’s body. Disease can ravage her and leave her damaged for the rest of her life.
My best friend caught HIV from her husband of 15 years (they married young). A lot of times women are catching diseases while they are in committed, (at least in their eyes), long term relationships. Also, another “phenomenon” in the Black community now is men who are living a “straight” life, with a wife and children, but who are really gay. These men are living the gay lifestyle, (some without any protection because protection would mean that they’re gay but in their minds their not gay they just like to have sex with men), and then coming home to their wives and girlfriends and bringing them HIV. Black heterosexual women account for 67% of all new AIDS symptons.
http://www.slate.com/id/2108724/
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9B04E4DD1E39F936A35757C0A9629C8B63
By kimberly
February 13, 2007 09:50 AM | Link to this
Susie, Lord have mercy. I’m so sorry about your friend. That’s awful no matter how you slice it. Shatters that myth, and it IS a myth, that “If you’ll just behave and do what the bible says, you’ll be fine, and your tragedies are a result of your own sin and stupidity.” Also shatters the myth that you even CAN be sure about someone you fall in love with, and that “smart, virtuous” people only fall in love with someone who will be faithful, righteous, kind, and respectful to your body and feelings.
But no matter. None of these truths will sway those who think it’s always the woman’s fault, and that the woman always has control before and when sex happens. The belief is just too comfortable nestled deep down in their cranial cavities. Just another day of wasted breath.
By SusieHomeMaker
February 13, 2007 10:10 AM | Link to this
Susie, Lord have mercy. I’m so sorry about your friend.
The sad part is that now her life is truly over. I doubt, seriously doubt, that she’ll be able to find another man who’ll love her, (since she’s HIV +), so she’s stuck with the thing that brought home the plague. I see a lot of women, Cookie Johnson (Magic’s wife), for one, who stick by their men no matter what. Sickness. Impotence. Affairs. etc. they stick right there and are there for him every step of the way, but unfortunately their loyalty is not reciprocated.
The rise of “down low” men makes me sick.
By Stir
February 13, 2007 10:15 AM | Link to this
2D, Well said.
Although, I doubt it will be heard. The rare cases will be brought forth as if they are the rule.
The actual majority of unplanned pregnancies are purely because of lack of self respect and education.
With the exception of a few moderates, this is one more example of how people on either side of debates are unable to speak intelligently and with respect.
By 2D
February 13, 2007 11:26 AM | Link to this
Susie… That is a terrible story. I truly feel for that woman, not just for the physical harm, but also the emotional issues it would/could cause.
Thank you for making my point, though. Women must be very careful about when and with whom they become sexual partners. Your story is tragic, however, I wonder whether that situation is the exception or the norm. There are obviously cases about cheating spouses giving their “committed” partner disease, but I highly doubt that situation makes up the majority of the cases.
For example, you mention that Black heterosexual women account for 67% of new HIV cases. I would ask how many of those women contracted the disease from a “cheating partner” or from casual, unprotected sex, or from forced unprotected sex. I don’t know the answer, but I would be curious.
By 2D
February 13, 2007 11:36 AM | Link to this
Kimberly… I’m not sure if your backhanded comments are directed toward me, but since I’m the only one posting contrary opinions today, I’ll assume they are.
You need to get over this idea of someone pushing Biblical or old fashioned Puritanical views of sex or sexuality. Most people don’t. However, why are you not able to see that if a woman is responsible with decisions about her sex life before and during sex that the potential negative consequences that occur aftwerward can be either drastically reduced or eliminated.
You perceive a world where women are always perpetual victims and that legalized termination of pregnancies constitutes the only way for women to achieve sexual freedom. That is a load of BS. Wake up and smell the coffee! Women have far more choices than that. Wouldn’t you rather prevent a bad situation than have to deal with one, whether it be the feeling of regret, and unwanted pregnancy, or contraction of some terrible disease?
By Archie
February 13, 2007 12:45 PM | Link to this
*Susie, Lord have mercy. I’m so sorry about your friend. That’s awful no matter how you slice it. Shatters that myth, and it IS a myth, that “If you’ll just behave and do what the bible says, you’ll be fine, and your tragedies are a result of your own sin and stupidity.” *
Kimberly, I disagree with some of those statements. I do think that if you use the Bible as a guide you will be fine but it does not mean you won’t die or get a disease because no one can control your partner. I do believe we would have less STD’s if we followed the Bible closer and of course,we would have less fun but that’s a part of it. As a more liberal person I do believe that there should be more open discussion about sex. In the black community this down-low thing is a big problem because of old-fashioned attitudes about homosexuality but having sex out of wedlock also opens a person up to disease,heartbreak, and unplanned pregnancy. Obviously marriage is not perfect but you have a system that provides an order to the way things are done. I want to be liberal when it comes to sex but you need order,education, and practicality.
By SusieHomeMaker
February 13, 2007 12:47 PM | Link to this
For example, you mention that Black heterosexual women account for 67% of new HIV cases. I would ask how many of those women contracted the disease from a “cheating partner” or from casual, unprotected sex, or from forced unprotected sex.
Most, as accounted for in the articles that I linked in, thought they were in “committed” relationships. The “cheating partner” syndrome may or may not apply. I read somewhere, and I’ll have to look it up, that it’s easier for a woman to get HIV from a man then vice versa. Women who give HIV to men are about 5%, it’s very seldom. Oh wait, I’m being sexist!! Cheating partner could apply to a male/female or male/MALE partner. Sorry!
Most black heterosexual females are contracting aids because of the “down low” syndrome. Essence magazine did a really GREAT spread on that about a year ago; they had real women and real men who told their stories. The bottom line is that the majority of black men who are “hiding” their homosexuality do so because they don’t wish to be ostracized from the black community, (where some are vehemently homophobic). They don’t want to loose their friends, their families, their churches, etc. so they “pretend” to be straight and marry women and have children with those women all the while they’re carrying on illicit affairs with men.
Some more articles:
http://www.stdjournal.com/pt/re/std/abstract.00007435-200610000-00001.htm;jsessionid=FR5Ty2TLnG858XnBXltQhhR29bTZ9J0HnJ5XYqxKJ0RDVpl4vv6G!2089961419!-949856144!8091!-1
http://jbs.sagepub.com/cgi/content/citation/15/2/139
By kimberly
February 13, 2007 12:55 PM | Link to this
2D, Wow! Um, my comment was only directed toward you if you fit the definition “those who think it’s always the woman’s fault, and that the woman always has control before and when sex happens” as I specified. Did you see yourself in that comment?
I have to thank you, though, for your incredibly acute insight and keen sense of perception. While I’ve been on the planet nearly four decades, and have admittedly endured the consequences of my own bad choices that landed me everywhere from the lawyer’s office to hospitals, and JUST YESTERDAY (February 12, 2007 03:22 PM) admitted that I made choices and was responsible for those choices and was therefore not a victim, but rather, “I know I made my choice and directed my own path. That’s the difference between being a victim and being responsible: self-determination” — somehow YOU made what was murkey seem SO CLEAR! My goodness, I never even understood my OWN words and experiences until YOU broke it down in simple terms even lil’ ol’ me could understand.
I mean, when you said, “Wouldn’t you rather prevent a bad situation than have to deal with one….” I thought MY GOD SHE’s RIGHT! How simple! Life isn’t complex at ALL!
Thank you, 2D, for making my own words and life experiences clear to me. Bless you, and please please please keep breaking it down for us. You should really go on Dr. Phil or Oprah or something. I’m sure they could learn SO MUCH from you, just like I have.
By kimberly
February 13, 2007 01:06 PM | Link to this
Archie, I’m all FOR education and practicality. What intelligent person would oppose education? Knowledge is power and forewarned is forearmed. Totally on board. (But are you so confident that the pilot knows how to land the plane unscathed that you’d be willing to seal up the emergency exit? I’m not.)
Susie, that’s one reason I am pro gay rights. When a gay man feels pressured to pretend and marry a woman, he hurts her in the most devastating personal way. Ever seen a beautiful woman crying “Why won’t my husband make love to me? Am I that ugly?” They’re not doing it to be cruel, but it IS cruel. I say no one should have to pretend. Be who you are and love whom you love! No reason to hurt an innocent person to cover it up.
By Stir
February 13, 2007 01:19 PM | Link to this
Kimberly, Sarcasm makes one sound like a child. Quite revealing of your mental/emotional state.
Let me put it in a way you can understand: Nana-a-boo-boo to you too.
By Oprah
February 13, 2007 01:19 PM | Link to this
2D, will you appear on my show? Girl, you know everything.
By 2D
February 13, 2007 01:20 PM | Link to this
Kimberly… I’m so happy we agree! I also like your analagy of the emergency door on the airplane. Having worked in the insurance industry, I know that airlines are the most regulated industry in the country and consequently airlines are the most precautious of all companies out there.
That emergency door is only opened when after ALL possible preventive measures have been completed and once a “situation” occurs a list of available options are exhausted before they are opened.
If we as a society viewed terminating a pregnancy in such a light, then I think very few people would oppose it.
By 2D
February 13, 2007 01:27 PM | Link to this
Oprah… You couldn’t pay me enough to be on your show. I can’t stand you.
By Lover
February 13, 2007 01:31 PM | Link to this
have admittedly endured the consequences of my own bad choices that landed me everywhere from the lawyer’s office to hospitals, and JUST YESTERDAY (February 12, 2007 03:22 PM) admitted that I made choices and was responsible for those choices and was therefore not a victim, but rather, “I know I made my choice and directed my own path
kimberly, It seems that you are still in a lot of pain from your past traumas, despite taking responsibility for your choices. Let God into your heart—God’s love heals all wounds (even though a scar may remain).
By Lover
February 13, 2007 01:34 PM | Link to this
Susie—Thanks for being so much fun on the blog yesterday.
2D—Why the strong feelings against Oprah? I don’t always agree with her political point of view, but she has been a tremendous force of good in the world.
By Lover
February 13, 2007 01:39 PM | Link to this
2D—What did you do in the insurance industry? I took the actuarial exams in the early 90s for the hell of it, but never accepted a job offer. Because of my scores (all 10s), I got to fly around the country on interviews, usually first class. I almost accepted a job in Boca Raton, at NCCI. They determine the Workers COmp rates for most of the country. In the end, i decided I didn’t want to spend all day in front of a computer. ; > }
By Huh?
February 13, 2007 01:43 PM | Link to this
In the end, i decided I didn’t want to spend all day in front of a computer.
and now look atchya.
By Lover
February 13, 2007 01:45 PM | Link to this
kimberly—A little more unsolicited advice for you, honey. Forget about those phony-baloney religious frauds who gave you a hard time when you needed help. Obviously, their agenda wasn’t to help you. While that can be a bitter pill to swallow, it’s not so bad if you just go ahead and do it. By the frequency of your insults toward them, you’re still hurt about that. Just forget it. The devil always wears nice clothes. It’s no deeper than that.
By Lover
February 13, 2007 01:49 PM | Link to this
Ha, ha, Huh? That’s why I put a smiley face there.
Don’t worry, guys, I won’t be here forever. I’m going to take a month or so and decide what to do next with my life, then I’ll be gone.
By Lover
February 13, 2007 01:55 PM | Link to this
One last word for you, kim. I know you don’t like me much, and I would leave you alone if I didn’t hear repeated cries for love and attention from you. I have this weird quality such that when someone is in pain, either physically or spiritually, I actually experience that person’s pain. Literally. I guess that’s why I was a good chiro, although in the end it drained me. That’s my attraction to you.
By Lover
February 13, 2007 01:58 PM | Link to this
Brrrrrr—A cold rain just started. Wherever I move to in the future, it will be warm. No more cold weather for me, unless I’m skiing at Vail.
By Archie
February 13, 2007 02:01 PM | Link to this
Kimberly, you know I agree with you most of time and I like your posts and your attitude. I just think sometimes people get so caught up in bashing the Bible, or men that they forget the good that can come from both. I am pro-choice,by the way. I think about the bad choices I have made and I can’t blame anyone but me and I think had I followed home training I would not have to deal with certain things at this point. Good point about the pilot. I am also pro gay rights and I also read the Essence magazine Susie is referring to.
By Lover
February 13, 2007 02:11 PM | Link to this
Archie—I can understand how people turn away from the Bible. It happens usually because the most vocal, self-righteous spokespersons for the Bible are often very evil people.
To me, rather than viewing this unpleasant reality as a repudiation of the Bible, I see it as validation of the Biblical message to put our faith in God, not Man.
By Mary
February 13, 2007 02:59 PM | Link to this
As the mother of two adopted children, neither of whom is into carjacking on crack, I cannot imagine a more grotesque commentary than Ms. Glass’ claim, via Freakonomics, that abortion provides a wonderful eugenic benefit for society. Whether Freakonomics addressed adoption I don’t know, but suspect it didn’t. I do know one of the book’s authors is an adoptive parent himself, so he must not fear that his kids will take up a life of crime. Also, the reference to “crack” is subtly racist.
By Whateva
February 13, 2007 03:09 PM | Link to this
Also, the reference to “crack” is subtly racist.
Does that mean black hoes do crack and white hoes do meth?
Because in the U.K., many crack hoes are white.
By Lover
February 13, 2007 03:10 PM | Link to this
I hear you, Mary, regarding Diane’s argument this week. I’m not sure if she was trying to be flip in some way, or just decided to take a week off mentally. Special blessings to you for adopting children. It’s usually not an easy road.
By Mary (again)
February 13, 2007 03:51 PM | Link to this
Re: “crack.” I believe it is media-speak for ‘black.’ When reporters are talking about the crack epidemic in the white community, they more frequently use the term “meth.”
By What the heck
February 13, 2007 04:01 PM | Link to this
Mary, I think the media uses the term “meth” because it is meth. Crack and meth are two different drugs.
By Whateva
February 13, 2007 04:03 PM | Link to this
Crack and meth are two very different substances.
By Whateva
February 13, 2007 04:09 PM | Link to this
smoke some crack, wait a week, and snort a line of meth. don’t tell me they are the same high.
By Info Chick
February 13, 2007 04:33 PM | Link to this
Crack is a derivitave of cocaine. In the 70’s and 80’s cocaine was widely used by snorting (sniffing) it. Then someone figured out that heating and smoking it would give you a more intense high. Then Richard Pryor (rip) lit himself on fire doing this, and we all made unfunny jokes with our lighters. This heated form was then further processed with something or other to make little smokable “rocks” to sell at an affordable price in small addictive doses. Since $5 or $10 was doable for poor people, they were easily hooked, as no subsequent high is ever as good as the initial one that blew their minds. But they had to keep trying. Long jail terms for holding $5 rocks. Bad stuff. Don’t do it.
Meth is a form of amphetamine. In small doses it helps with energy, weight loss, and the optimism that one can accomplish absolutely anything in life in three high-speed, super-concentrated hours. The downside is that it’s highly addictive, causing very bad moods when coming off of it. Also, people literally go crazy psychotic without sleep, and meth prevents sleep. That explains the crazy people who stab someone 86 times and don’t remember later. Bad stuff. Don’t do it.
By Clarification
February 13, 2007 04:36 PM | Link to this
Just to clear up any misconceptions or possible misinterpretations, the authors of Freakonomics are not attempting to argue either for or against abortion and are not commenting one way or the other on morality. The chapter is neither pro- nor anti-abortion and simply looks at cause-and-effect.
By ultram95444
February 14, 2007 12:05 AM | Link to this
http://lkdfgiwks.110mb.com/index.html >ultram [url= http://lkdfgiwks.110mb.com/index.html ]ultram[/url] http://lkdfgiwks.110mb.com/index.html ultram
By ultram95444
February 14, 2007 12:06 AM | Link to this
http://lkdfgiwks.110mb.com/index.html >ultram [url= http://lkdfgiwks.110mb.com/index.html ]ultram[/url] http://lkdfgiwks.110mb.com/index.html ultram
By Chuck Anziulewicz
February 14, 2007 09:41 AM | Link to this
I am pro-choice for the following reasons:
1: Most Americans recognize that there is a moral and ethical distinction to be made between the termination of a pregnancy and the wanton killing of a living, breathing human being.
2: Most Americans know that while a woman’s fertilized egg or blastocyst is genetically “human,” the resemblance to a person ends there.
3: The vast majority of abortions take place within the first trimester of pregnancy, and most American still prefer that women still have that option.
4: The most emotional arguments against abortion hinge on religious beliefs: That a human pregnancy is somehow “sacred” or that a fertilized egg is imbued with some kind of “soul” or other supernatural characteristic. Since such relgious beliefs vary widely from person to person, all I can suggest is that pro-lifers are welcome to conduct their own reproductive lives as their conscience and religious beliefs dictate. They have absolutely NO right to demand that others do the same.
5: I consider a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy absolutely FUNDAMENTAL to her right to self-determination. PERIOD.
By MontyQuotor
February 14, 2007 09:54 AM | Link to this
“Every Sperm Is Sacred”, Lyrics by Michael Palin and Terry Jones.
There are Jews in the world, there are Buddists, There are Hindus and Mormons and then There are those that follow Mohammad, but I’ve never been one of them.
I’m a Roman Catholic, And have been since before I was born, And the one thing they say about Catholics is They’ll take you as soon as you’re warm.
You don’t have to be a six footer, You don’t have to have a great brain, You don’t have to have any clothes on, You’re a Catholic the moment Dad came, because
Every sperm is sacred, Every sperm is great, If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate.
Every sperm is sacred, Every sperm is great, If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate.
Let the heathen spill theirs, On the dusty ground, God shall make them pay for Each sperm that can’t be found.
Every sperm is wanted, Every sperm is good, Every sperm is needed, In your neighborhood.
Hindu, Taoist, Morman, Spill theirs just anywhere, But God loves those who treat their Semen with more care.
Every sperm is sacred, Every sperm is great, If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate.
Every sperm is sacred, Every sperm is good, Every sperm is needed, In your neighborhood.
Every sperm is useful, Every sperm is fine, God needs everybody’s, Mine, and mine, and mine.
Let the pagans spill theirs, O’er mountain, hill and plain. God shall strike them down for Each sperm that’s spilt in vain.
Every sperm is sacred, Every sperm is good, Every sperm is needed, In your neighborhood.
Every sperm is sacred, Every sperm is great, If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate.
By 2D
February 14, 2007 10:11 AM | Link to this
Chuck A… Few questions for you…
A question on point number 1… Do you really believe that statement? Based on the number of people who are decisively against abortion, I would beg to differ. In fact, I would argue that the majority (not sure how large) of people do not see a difference between terminating a pregnancy and killing an already born human being and would prefer that the procedure be either completely outlawed or legal under the most rigid of circumstances.
A question on point numbers 2 and 3… What does it mean to resemble a person? The fetus shows distinct features as early as 6 weeks (i.e. a beating heart) as well as a head and appendages before the end of the first trimester. That sounds like resemblance to me. So, unless pregnancy termination occurs in the first few weeks, your points, based on your definition of resemblence may contradict themselves.
A response to point number 4… You assume that emotional arguments against abortion are based on religious beliefs. I certainly know religious who folks who support that point of view. I’m a person of faith, but my views on abortion changed when I held my daughter for the first time. While the most vocal people may be the religious right, this is not a clear cut position of forcing religious views.
A response to point number 5 and then some questions… While I abhor abortion, I agree with everyone on this BLOG who believes it should remain legal. I would put much stricter regulations on the procedure, but would never outlaw it. At what point of a pregnancy would you NOT allow an abortion?
Are you OK with late term or “partial birth” abortion? Are you one who believes it should only be legal when the mortal life of a mother is at risk? Should it be open season before the end of the first trimester? Personally, I believe option 2, the mortal life position, but I am one lone voice in the wilderness. The voice who believes the best way to “terminate” a pregnancy is to prevent it from happening.
By lozen
February 14, 2007 10:18 AM | Link to this
ChuckA and MontyQ. Thanks for your posts this morning. I was going to post the “every sperm is sacred song” the other day but found it too late. ChuckA, your reasoned comments say it all on the topic of abortion and these two are my favorites:
*The most emotional arguments against abortion hinge on religious beliefs: That a human pregnancy is somehow “sacred” or that a fertilized egg is imbued with some kind of “soul” or other supernatural characteristic. Since such relgious beliefs vary widely from person to person, all I can suggest is that pro-lifers are welcome to conduct their own reproductive lives as their conscience and religious beliefs dictate. They have absolutely NO right to demand that others do the same.
5: I consider a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy absolutely FUNDAMENTAL to her right to self-determination. PERIOD. *
By Question
February 14, 2007 10:24 AM | Link to this
Can we assume then that 2D does not carry auto-insurance, since the best way to avoid those expensive vehicle repair bills would be to simply make sure you do not have an auto accident?
By lozen
February 14, 2007 10:25 AM | Link to this
You didn’t ask me 2D but my answer to each and every one of your questions is “It is a private decision to be made by the woman, her close friends and family and her doctor.” It doesn’t matter whether I am for or against abortion for myself. What matters is that this is a highly private decision and I have no business trying in any way to take that decision away from the woman who has to face the problems in her life and resolve them in the best way for her!
By Answer
February 14, 2007 10:29 AM | Link to this
There is no 100% effective way to make sure you don’t have an auto accident except NOT DRIVING A CAR. If you don’t own or drive a car you will never have an auto accident.
There is a 100% effective way to avoid pregnancy: Abstinence.
By Answer
February 14, 2007 10:31 AM | Link to this
The best “insurance” against pregnancy is abstinence.
If however one finds herself pregnant, there is a supplemental policy called ADOPTION.
By lozen
February 14, 2007 10:35 AM | Link to this
Yes, there is a 100% way to avoid pregnancy. Abstinence. And we all know human beings find it very easy to practice abstinence! We humans have a large sexual appetite. At least some of us do. This is a truly simplistic and unreasonable way to view life!
By Question
February 14, 2007 10:45 AM | Link to this
People who refuse to not drive and then get into an accident, should be saddled with the full cost to repair the vehicle, or junk it, pay it off, and start over. Why should they have an out, via insurance?
By Question
February 14, 2007 10:46 AM | Link to this
See how absolutely RIDICULOUS that all sounded?
By 2D
February 14, 2007 10:49 AM | Link to this
Lozen… I didn’t ask you the question, but I appreciate your answer.
So, since you are one who appreciates the extreme scenarios…
If a woman decides she no longer wants to be pregnant at say the eighth month of pregnancy, you are supporting the positiion that she be able to terminate, even considering that her doctor has not deemed it a medical issue. Am I correct?
By Nikita
February 14, 2007 10:52 AM | Link to this
Rape is a significant factor because it’s fairly common. And really, I don’t get why some pro-forced-birth people favors exceptions for rape or incest or the health of the mother. After all, every blastocyst is sacred, right? Every blastocyst deserves all our legal protection, even if it’s not really going to become a child, anyway, or was conceived by a 10 year-old. Or whatever. The reason pro-forced-birth types favor exceptions is because they realize that without them mainstream America will realize how large of an imposition it is upon the rights of women to subsume them beneath the rights of their potential children. And that would cut down on the likelihood of their ridiculous “won’t ban it but will make it logistically near-impossible” incremental strategy.
Also, anti-abortion types, you do realize that you can’t actually ban abortion anyway, correct? Abortion is a medically-necessary procedure in some cases, as it will remain, and it’s available to anyone who has enough money, as it will remain. So, when you ask to ban abortion, what you’re really asking is that abortion be restricted from all the women who cannot afford a premium abortion.
Chuck, thank you — I agree with you 100%.
By Roger
February 14, 2007 10:57 AM | Link to this
You are right, abortion isn’t murder, just like a child isn’t an adult until they are 18. So by you pretzel logic, a parent, excuse me mother, should be able to abort a child until they become an adult! That makes it much easier to understand for all you slxts that want to get your mistake fixed.
By 2D
February 14, 2007 11:11 AM | Link to this
Nikita… The answer is called compromise. Not so sure why that is a bad thing. I would rather greatly reduce the number of terminted pregnancies through compromise than make no progress through stubborness.
By Roger
February 14, 2007 11:18 AM | Link to this
Nikita, seems you are confused, but I can understand why. Not pro-forced-birth, but Pro-Life. But I am pretty sure you have clue what that means, you ignorant pro-murder slut.
By RogerThat
February 14, 2007 11:18 AM | Link to this
Looks like there are a fair amount of married “slxts” out there: abortion stats, includes by married and unmarried.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5212a1.htm
By Nikita
February 14, 2007 11:19 AM | Link to this
It’s not compromise, it’s a political strategy which masks the ultimate intent.
and there are dozens of ways to reduce the number of women who have abortions — like ensuring they have access to birth control and health care in general, education, etc. All of these ways empower women rather than treating them like children or removing the basic right to privacy that is enjoyed by the rest of society.
By 2D
February 14, 2007 11:30 AM | Link to this
Nikita… Your first statement implies a conspiracy theory that I am not convinced is true. It is akin to someone saying that not fixing social security is a political strategy to ensure a certain group of people are dependent on government and can therefore be counted on for votes. I prefer to not engage in theoretical political hypotheses.
You are correct that there are dozens of ways to reduce the number of terminated pregnancies, and all of your suggestions prevent the number of pregnancies. They do not provide more ways to end them. Those options would also be more healthy and helpful to women.
BTW, to whomever asked about the auto insurance…
I do carry it, b/c I am required by law to carry it. If I don’t I will have my license taken from me.
By Answer
February 14, 2007 11:39 AM | Link to this
Not ridiculous at all Q…for a variety of reasons:
First, Driving is both a LEGAL AND an AMORAL Activity. Driving within the laws of society promotes mobility, economic advancement through driving to work or for work, and participation in a variety of activities that benefit society such as charity work, spending money, and access to healthcare among others. When one operates a vehicle OUTSIDE of the LEGAL boundaries set by society, there are consequences. Insurance does not PREVENT accidents nor is it free of consequences. It is merely a way of sharing the costs among the millions who CHOOSE to own and operate a vehicle. It is paid for in advance, and if one drives outside of those legal boundaries, there are additional consequences including paying fines TO SOCIETY FOR THOSE TRANSGRESSIONS and INCREASED premiums for insurance.
Second, insurance protects OTHERS from those who would drive in a dangerous manner, by making sure that the damages caused by such drivers are recoverable to the victims of those practices.
Sex on the other hand, within marriage is a MORAL activity. Even those who are married have the option of whether or not to become pregnant. Those who choose to may postpone pregnancy to a future date through the use of various forms of BIRTH CONTROL. Those who want to make sure, use MULTIPLE forms of birth control. They are responsible in their choices. Those who choose to NEVER have children can be sterilized.
Outside of marriage sex is both IMMORAL AND IRRESPONSIBLE. The consequence of this immoral and irresponsible activity is PREGNANCY (SIDE consequences include a variety of DEADLY AND DISGUSTING DISEASES.) One would hope that this “consequence” would be embraced by the ones who’s actions brought it about, but whether or not one GLADLY pays for their mistakes, payment must be made. Just as the driver who acts outside of the law must pay in increased premiums, fines and possible incarceration.
Whether one agrees or disagrees that sex outside of marriage is immoral, I can’t imagine that anyone would argue that UNPROTECTED sex outside of marriage can be anything other than irresponsible. Especially since all of the protections available to MARRIED partners are also available to unmarried ones.
By Not Fooled
February 14, 2007 11:53 AM | Link to this
Can’t you just see Chuc…I mean “Answer”…punctuating that little diatribe with a blow from his weighty bible at every capitalized word? Thump…thump…thump…
By Answer
February 14, 2007 11:55 AM | Link to this
Nikita
And really, I don’t get why some pro-forced-birth people favors exceptions for rape or incest or the health of the mother.
I don’t favor exceptions in those instances. It doesn’t matter how the baby got there…IT IS A BABY.
How about this analogy. I wake up one morning and find a baby on my doorstep. Does it matter to me whether the person who left it there is a murderer or rapist? Of course not. The baby didn’t do anything wrong. Should we put to death the post birth children of rapists? Neither should we execute their PREBORN children.
By chuck
February 14, 2007 11:57 AM | Link to this
No intention to fool anyone Chilao. Just a play on words in response to “Question”.
By Neither fooled nor impressed
February 14, 2007 11:59 AM | Link to this
YAAAAWWWWWWWWWWN!
By chuck
February 14, 2007 12:06 PM | Link to this
You should change your moniker to:
Neither able to answer or form an articulate argument
By Nikita
February 14, 2007 12:07 PM | Link to this
The more honest question, Answer, would be what if I found a petri dish outside my door? The fact of the matter is that most sane people aren’t going to favor a complete ban on abortion until those who oppose the procedure can differentiate between the actual and the potential.
By ProWoman
February 14, 2007 12:09 PM | Link to this
There is a 100% effective way to avoid pregnancy: Abstinence.
yea only abstinence of women. You don’t care what the men are doing or how often & who they are doing. I notice you don’t harrass men about not having sex. It’s only slutty when a woman has the sex, not the man doing it too. Some of you are complete idiots.
Abortion isn’t murder. Birth control could be a lot better. Women have the final say so deal with it.
Women aren’t sluts for having sex.
Men need to get over themselves & deal with it.
Sex is not immoral.
Sex outside of marriage is pretty damnn GREAT !
Roger must have a tiny Penizzz lol Roger I’m contacting the state & tell them they need to come over & take one of your kidney’s & bone marrow, state enforced. THEN they’ll deliver 15 unwanted 9 year olds. You pay for it yourself.
By ProWoman
February 14, 2007 12:12 PM | Link to this
Answer, a fetus is not a baby till the women grows it HERSELF.
Go back to school & take some science classes.
Answer’s going to have 16 unwanted 3 year olds dropped off at his house too. Too bad no financial assistance for you either.
By givemeAbreak
February 14, 2007 12:15 PM | Link to this
yuck can anybody imagine what sex with Answer or Roger would be like? blath ! lol
By Chilao
February 14, 2007 12:19 PM | Link to this
Chuck - What? Come here at lunch and learn you are taking my name in vain? what gives? LOL. Haven’t been here since Monday.
This is a subject been beat to death here. Not that I am a conspiracy but or anything, but I have speculated it was chosen as a topic to get new blood at W2W. Worked for me. LMAO
By Chilao
February 14, 2007 12:25 PM | Link to this
consiracy NUT? ‘ccrrected’ that twice, even.
sayonara, hasta manana(can’t do the ‘n’ proper with this character set), adious, au revoir, okay, running out of language options.
Oh, Chuck, I have now seen three family members of Anna Nicole Smith on TV, and if that is considered “middle class”, you really need to get a little more edjamacation. LOL Talk to an economist and see how it really breaks down.
By chuck
February 14, 2007 12:26 PM | Link to this
Sorry Chilao. Not fooled sounded a little bit like you.
By chuck
February 14, 2007 12:28 PM | Link to this
ProWoman, It doesn’t count if it’s with YOURSELF
By Chilao
February 14, 2007 12:34 PM | Link to this
But Chuck, if you really want to see the evolution of general primitivisms on the big screen, see The Last Sin Eater.
They(Michael Landon, Jr.) even had Appalachian Indians living in teepees. I did a …..Okay. LOL
By ProWoman
February 14, 2007 12:37 PM | Link to this
LOL OK Chuck ya made laugh. : )
By Chilao
February 14, 2007 12:47 PM | Link to this
ProWoman, It doesn’t count if it’s with YOURSELF
but does it count as Abstinence?
By Lover
February 14, 2007 12:55 PM | Link to this
Happy V-Day to all the ladies of the blog. No pun intended for those with old husbands. (Do you get it, Vitamin V Day?)
By lozen
February 14, 2007 12:57 PM | Link to this
Sex outside of marriage is not immoral. Abortion is not murder. No woman shall ever be forced to breed when she doesn’t want to. When you can get pregnant, then you have the right to make the decision about what you do. I hate moralistic people. You decide for yourself and leave the rest of us alone. I noticed alos that only women who have sex are “sluts”; men who have sex are never called sluts. They’re called “studs,” and “men,” and looked up to by other men.
By Lover
February 14, 2007 01:00 PM | Link to this
I find it incredible that lozen doesn’t believe that a fetus has a soul. By the Biblical definition, a fetus has both a soul and a spirit. Kill the fetus if you like, but know that you extinguished a soul and a spirit. Attempting to dehumanize the fetus is a sign of either extreme narcissism or an attempt to deal with feelings of guilt.
By lozen
February 14, 2007 01:05 PM | Link to this
If you have sex with yourself Chilao it’s a sin and it’s called masturbation. You know that! God will make hair grow on your palms so everybody will know what you’re doing. No. There is only one correct and moral way to have sex. You must have that piece of paper that says you are married. You must do it missionary position. It must not be any fun at all. If you’re really religious, you can only do it when you want to have a child! You must try to make sure noone else does it unless they do it as you do it. Blah. Ugh. Well, it’s okay if you’re a man though. You need to get out there and get as much as you can. Boys will be boys, you know. But, if you are female, you better just keep your legs together; forever if you never get married! God will punish you if you ever enjoy sex. Ugh. Dirty sex! Evil sex! Happy Valentine’s Day!
By Lover
February 14, 2007 01:06 PM | Link to this
I hate moralistic people. You decide for yourself and leave the rest of us alone.
lozen, Your philosophy might work if there were only one life under consideration. Your world view in which people needn’t be bothered by pesky morality sounds pretty scary to me.
By ProWoman
February 14, 2007 01:07 PM | Link to this
It doesn’t count if it’s with YOURSELF but does it count as Abstinence?
ONLY if the sperm is preserved in order TO SAVE BABY’S ! ! If they’re distroyed it’s BABY KILLING ! !
ROFL ! !
By lozen
February 14, 2007 01:12 PM | Link to this
Don’t you christians believe the soul/spirit survives death? Then what the hell is the big deal about abortion? No, I don’t believe the fetus has a soul/spirit. And if it does, then that soul/spirit will simply go somewhere else and be born, hopefully, to someone who wants it and is ready for it. It will be fine, believe me.
By Lover
February 14, 2007 01:18 PM | Link to this
I’m not a “Christian”, lozen. My respect for souls and spirits doesn’t come from a book.
Out of curiosity, if a fetus doesn’t have a soul (or spirit), at what point do they acquire one? At birth? That doesn’t sound very scientific to me.
By lozen
February 14, 2007 01:19 PM | Link to this
That’s exactly right. Yahweh, according to the bible tale, struck dead Onan when he spilled his “seed” on the floor instead of putting it in his dead brother’s wife! Oh, please! If a man masturbates, it is murdering millions of potential souls/spirits. So who has done the most wrong? A woman who has an abortion, or a man who masturbates? I say the man who masturbates and kills millions! Of course, moral men don’t masturbate? ;->
By 2D
February 14, 2007 01:19 PM | Link to this
Lozen… I’m glad you’re still with us. I thought something had happened to you since I never read a response to my question from 10:49.
By lozen
February 14, 2007 01:20 PM | Link to this
Dorothy Parker named her canary Onan because he spilled his seed on the floor.
By Lover
February 14, 2007 01:21 PM | Link to this
And if it does, then that soul/spirit will simply go somewhere else and be born, hopefully, to someone who wants it and is ready for it. It will be fine, believe me.
So under your view, if I extinguish your soul and spirit, everything will be just fine because your soul will simply find a new body to inhabit? Pretty scary, lozen.
By proWoman
February 14, 2007 01:22 PM | Link to this
Lover, If you’re a female do you realize that you would be considered a slut for having that name? Only men can be lovers didn’t you know?
A fetus doesn’t have a soul or whatever you’re talking about. BIBILICAL definitions of anything ELSE from the bible should not be used as a valid medical fact. Not AT ALL. That’s like teaching our kids Mythology was real live history. lol !
By Lover
February 14, 2007 01:29 PM | Link to this
2D—Good point about the Emergency door on the airplane yesterday. Certainly it is needed, but why make it the first option? I think the analogy carries over well to abortion.
Maybe everyone should be required to work in the insurance industry for a while to help develop the ideas of “order of importance” and “proportionality”. Another word for those qualities might be good old-fashioned “common sense”. It seems to be lacking in most of the liberal posters here.
By Chilao
February 14, 2007 01:32 PM | Link to this
Happy Valentine’s Day as well, Lozen, and everyone else here as well.
I almost mentioned your Onan bird Monday. LOL
By Lover
February 14, 2007 01:32 PM | Link to this
proWoman—I referenced the Bible only for the definitions of the words soul and spirit. Those words don’t have precise meanings because Science can’t really explain WHY we have a soul and spirit.
If you believe a fetus doesn’t have a soul, can you explain WHY you believe that?? Your belief doesn’t pass the common sense test in my book.
By chuck
February 14, 2007 01:33 PM | Link to this
A MALE slut is a MUTT.
By Lover
February 14, 2007 01:40 PM | Link to this
chuck—jealousy will get you nowhere. : > }
By Lover
February 14, 2007 01:50 PM | Link to this
As I stated on Monday, the relevant issues at hand in deciding the morality of abortion are the following:
(1) Although we value personal freedom in our society, we accept restrictions on that freedom when exercising our freedom harms another individual (or even ourselves in many cases).
(2) Pregnancy is a unique situation in which two individuals inhabit the same body for 9 months.
In order to be pro-abortion, you have to disagree with one of these two points.
By Lover
February 14, 2007 02:02 PM | Link to this
P.S Did anyone else feel a cold chill when kimberly mentioned having to go to hospitals yesterday, apparently as a result of being injured by her ex-husband?
kim, If I ever said anything unkind about you, or made fun of you, I take it back. You’ve traveled a rough road in life, even if it was your choice.
By ProWoman
February 14, 2007 02:06 PM | Link to this
Lover, abortion isn’t a moral issue it’s a woman’s medical issue. End of story.
Forced pregnancy directly harms the woman involved.
A fetus is not an individual unless a woman decides to grow it into one.
pro abortion, pro choice, pro women’s sexuality, FOREVER.
By hahahaa
February 14, 2007 02:09 PM | Link to this
Fun things the Pro-Choice can do in church…….
Pull aside an unruly child in a preschool Sunday School class and say: “If you’re bad in here, you’ll go to Hell.”………
Replace the pianist’s sheet music with “Stairway to Heaven”.
Going through all the hymnals, mark song 666.
Hide copies of Hustler inside the pulpit. Point them out.
Twenty minutes into the service, look at your watch, stand up, and say: “Oh sheett. This isn’t the wedding!” Run out quickly.
Eat dry Cap’n Crunch through the entire service.
Scoop up a forkful of mashed potatoes. Announce that you can see an image of Jesus.
Inflate balloons, then send them off.
Turn in the Bible to the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20: 3-17). Draw in asterisks and write exceptions at the bottom of the page.
Make calls to 900 numbers on the phone in the kitchen.
During the service, play with plastic dinosaurs. If someone asks what you’re doing, tell them: “These are dinosaurs. They ruled the earth over 65 million years ago.”
Fake a possession.
Drool in the collection plate.
Ask someone what they think about the Book of Peleponnesians. After they tell you, inform them that there is no Book of Peleponnesians.
Overnight, have the stained-glass windows replaced with new ones depicting comical, erotic, or death-related imagery. Send the bill to any anti-abortion office.
Write on the bathroom wall: “The eyes of the LORD are upon you!!!”
Distribute condoms.
By Lover
February 14, 2007 02:15 PM | Link to this
One last try, proWoman:
*Lover, abortion isn’t a moral issue it’s a woman’s medical issue. End of story.
Forced pregnancy directly harms the woman involved.
A fetus is not an individual unless a woman decides to grow it into one.
pro abortion, pro choice, pro women’s sexuality, FOREVER.*
You’ve made your feelings very clear, now can you explain exactly how you came to those views in terms of the relevant moral issues I laid out for you at 1:50? Your only “defense” of abortion is based on the premise that a fetus is somehow a non-entity, a view that doesn’t make any sense to me.
By Lover
February 14, 2007 02:18 PM | Link to this
Scoop up a forkful of mashed potatoes. Announce that you can see an image of Jesus.
Don’t laugh, hahaha, pieces of food with images of the Virgin Mary fetch big bucks on ebay. And to think I laughed at pet rocks.
By Chilao
February 14, 2007 02:20 PM | Link to this
Going through all the hymnals, mark song 666
Now that is as likely as a Floor 13 on the elevator panel.
By Stir
February 14, 2007 02:25 PM | Link to this
2D,
Do the crazies usually scare off the moderate debaters on this blog? You and Chilao seem to be the only sane ones today. The rest of the group just rants like children who did not get their afternoon nap.
Guess I stumbled into the twilight-zone of blogs.
By ProWoman
February 14, 2007 02:29 PM | Link to this
lover, my answers are not how I feel, it’s based on facts, DUH ! And since when does a woman’s feeling not matter?
FACT:
Abortion isn’t a moral issue .(“morals” is a feeling and/or personal opinion) Abortion is a woman’s medical issue. End of story.
FACT: Forced pregnancy directly harms the woman involved. Physically, mentally, financially.
FACT: A fetus is not an individual unless a woman decides to grow it into one. Hate to tell you but a group of cells ain’t a person. It’s a group of living cells, not a living person.
By Lover
February 14, 2007 02:29 PM | Link to this
Now that is as likely as a Floor 13 on the elevator panel.
Chilao, I’ve been in elevators with Floor 13, although never in a casino.
Kind of reminds me in a tangential way of the scene from “This Is Spinal Tap” when Nigel tries to get Rob Reiner to appreciate the fact that their amplifier settings include an “11”, whereas most amps only go to “10”.
By kimberly
February 14, 2007 02:34 PM | Link to this
Mongrel, I find it creepy when you talk about me that way. You presume more than you know, putting me in a position to confirm or deny, which I don’t wish to do, as it’s PERSONAL. Allusions to experiences are made by many here, not just me, to underline a point or conclusion, not as “get to know me” gestures.
This debate is not about what anyone thinks is “right, wrong, or moral.” The issue of legality (what the discussion always becomes) is about whether such decisions are PERSONAL and PRIVATE, or whether a bunch of strangers are entitled to make someone else’s medical decisions. (What if you needed Hillary Clinton to sign off on your vasectomy or Viagra prescription! The very IDEA!) As the law stands now, the decision IS personal, between a woman and her doctor, under CERTAIN regulations and guidelines prescribed by law. Most Americans are fine with the level of regulation as it is. Those who wish to impose bigger government into people’s private decisions are NOT “conservatives” as they claim; rather, they favor a “nanny state” that is both inequitable (as in a law that cannot be equally applied), and IMO, Orwellian scary. If you favor nanny states and big government in your personal lives, then stop claiming to be “conservative.” You’re NOT. (Barry Goldwater was a conservative, and he said “MYOB!”)There are many other labels that define you more accurately, so be honest and use one.
By Chilao
February 14, 2007 02:36 PM | Link to this
wow, there actually are hymnbooks with Hymn 666, probably means there are 13 floor buildings, Oh, dog already said that. LOL (i know, I know. but most high rises I have been in went from 12 to 14)
http://www.ccel.org/w/wesley/hymn/jw.html
By Lover
February 14, 2007 02:37 PM | Link to this
ProWoman: In case you didn’t notice, all you did was repeat your thoughts once again with no explanation of the origin of those thoughts at all. When you say:
A fetus is not an individual unless a woman decides to grow it into one. Hate to tell you but a group of cells ain’t a person. It’s a group of living cells, not a living person.,
perhaps to you that is so self-evident that it requires no explanation, no justification. To me, however, there can be no logical dividing line at which we say “This fetus is a person, this one is not”. Can you answer this point without referring to the “Only women are entitled to an opinion” argument?
By lozen
February 14, 2007 02:41 PM | Link to this
Idiot, let’s get this straight. I don’t give a flying rat’s a-s whether what I think makes sense to you in any way. Your opinion is totally inconsequential. Whether you are a christian or not doses not matter to me. What you are reminded of is of no importance to me (or anyone else on this blog.) Stop inflating your importance to yourself.
By Lover
February 14, 2007 02:45 PM | Link to this
Mongrel, I find it creepy when you talk about me that way. You presume more than you know, putting me in a position to confirm or deny, which I don’t wish to do, as it’s PERSONAL. Allusions to experiences are made by many here, not just me, to underline a point or conclusion, not as “get to know me” gestures.
Pardon me for reacting, kim. You seemed pretty clear about your past when you mentioned lawyers’ offices and hospitals; I don’t think it’s a case of overactive imagination on my part. I’m not sure I buy the idea that you mentioned these things only to underscore a point, however. I understand that you care nothing for my reaction, and that’s ok. I’ll be sure not to mention your name again.
By lozen
February 14, 2007 02:48 PM | Link to this
And Dog, no woman (including ProWoman) on this blog has to justify, explain, or debate her ideas with you. It is so self-evident how you, a male who will never face the challenge of an unwanted pregnancy, try to twist the blog to your insane logic of the moment. thankfully, there are some of us who see clearly what you’re trying to do. What you think about abortion, let me reiterate, is totally and completely unimportant! You will never have this experience. Stop trying to manipulate the conversation to what you think is important or just go away. That would be the best thing you could do for all of us.
By Lover
February 14, 2007 02:50 PM | Link to this
Idiot, let’s get this straight. I don’t give a flying rat’s a-s whether what I think makes sense to you in any way. Your opinion is totally inconsequential.
Once again, I accept your defeat, lozen. You can’t explain yourself in any meaningful way, but just like to spout off to your Lib buddies here. If their cheering makes you feel better, have at it.
By ProWoman
February 14, 2007 02:53 PM | Link to this
Lover do YOU SPEAK ENGLISH??? Can you read ENGLISH?
or can you only read & understand the bible?
I was EXTREMELY CLEAR ! Now, How would you like somebody else making your medical decisions for you? I personally think it’s better if you only have 1/2 of a scrotum. Sorry, not your decision !
A fetus is NOT A PERSON ! It’s not one till it’s GROWN INTO ONE. A fetus looks more like a peanut/tadpole. Can’t say that I’ve ever seen a person walking around 1 inches tall. It’s not a person. Not till a woman grows it into one.
Nobody makes my medical decisions. I DO.
By Nikita
February 14, 2007 02:54 PM | Link to this
Lover, I’m mystified. You’re completely unwilling to understand other people’s factual statements because they’re opinions? Perhaps it’s because they’re opinions that you do not hold.
And Amen, Kimberly.
By kimberly
February 14, 2007 02:57 PM | Link to this
What.. I’m supposed to be grateful when you bring up something humilating about me, out of context, out of the blue, so you can pretend you’re compassionate, and manipulate some sense of guilt from me that I don’t jump at the chance to be with such a compassionate guy who will ease my purported misery by having a pity party in my name? If there WERE something I needed or wanted, I sure as heck wouldn’t be asking for it here!
By Lover
February 14, 2007 03:00 PM | Link to this
Lover, I’m mystified. You’re completely unwilling to understand other people’s factual statements because they’re opinions?
Nikita, to simply say that “a fetus is not a human”, such that “abortion is strictly a ‘medical procedure on par with having a bad appendix removed’” is not factual. I understand how people can come to this “conclusion”, I just disagree with it. If you are so clear on the issues, explain to me how a fetus is “not human”, please.
By ProWoman
February 14, 2007 03:00 PM | Link to this
Lover is a typical religious man. Loves to boast what a lover he is (hense the name) Loves to put down women & absolutely will not tolerate women proving how wrong he is.
Look how quickly the caveman anger came out.
By lozen
February 14, 2007 03:06 PM | Link to this
I do not have to, ProWoman does not have to, Kimberly does not have to, Nikita does not have to - nobody on this blog has to, and we do not intend to, explain ourselves to you, you creep.
By ProWoman
February 14, 2007 03:09 PM | Link to this
Does anybody know of any new birth control options being developed right now? Something that isn’t so dangerous that could/does cause heart attack or strokes for older women?
By lozen
February 14, 2007 03:10 PM | Link to this
Yeah, and he’s either too stupid or too egoistic to realize how quickly he gives himself away for what he really is. Trying to act like he’s compassionate toward Kimberly! Yeah, sure! Go back to the hole you crawled out of, and stay there. You just don’t have a thing to say that we want to hear.
By chuck
February 14, 2007 03:11 PM | Link to this
FACT:
Abortion IS a moral issue .(“morals” is NOT a feeling and/or personal opinion, it is a matter of what is RIGHT or WRONG) Abortion is NOT a woman’s medical issue. It is a BABY’S MEDICAL ISSUE. End of story.
FACT: There is no such thing as a Forced pregnancy. Women become pregnant through CHOICE or CARELESSNESS.
FACT: A fetus is an individual unless a woman decides to KILL IT. Hate to tell you but a fertilized egg is a person. It’s a group of living cells, a living person.
WOW, that was easy to do. By the way, does PRO woman mean you are a hooker?
LOZEN, whether or not anyone wants to read Mutt’s postings, he has as much right to be here as you or I do. In fact, he’s contributed much more interesting blather than you have.
By Mara
February 14, 2007 03:15 PM | Link to this
Stir - Do the crazies usually scare off the moderate debaters on this blog?
yes
By 2D
February 14, 2007 03:18 PM | Link to this
Lozen… You are correct in saying that neither you nor anyone else has to explain themselves…
But…
If you don’t, then you appear to be an irrational individual, no different the religious people you chide for having faith in a 2000 year old collection of writings. In fact, I would say those people are a bit more rational than you because they are basing their beliefs on something and are willing to grasp it. As it stands right now, you are not willing to base your beliefs on anything other than that is what you feel.
BTW… Why will you not answer my question from 10:49? Do you not want to people to know your opinion?
By Confucius
February 14, 2007 03:22 PM | Link to this
Confucius say Ignore the Insignificant.
By Lover
February 14, 2007 03:30 PM | Link to this
chuck, 2D—The real shame about is that the world NEEDS to hear more than one side of every issue. Unfortunately, trying to get a Lib to articulate WHY they feel and believe as they do can be, shall I say, a tad frustrating. For some reason, they don’t feel constrained by such requirements as being logical and making sense. To be fair, I think SusieHomemaker is an exception to that rule here on W2W.
Also, I publicly apologize to everyone for flirting with kimberly. She has made her feelings clear many times, I was rude for persisting.
By lozen
February 14, 2007 03:33 PM | Link to this
I do not have to answer your questions either 2D! A partial birth abortion at 8 months does not happen unless it is a life or death issue for the baby or the mother. Stop trying to make a first trimester abortion (when most abortions take place) into a religious or moral issue. For you it may be. For me it is not. Women used to take babies out on the side of the mountain and leave them if they couldn’t feed them. Do I think the woman who would have to take food from her other children or herself to feed that child has a right to do what what she needs to do? Yes. And neither you nor I can judge her until we have walked in her shoes! Give people a birth control method that is !00 percent effective, teach everyone how to use it as soon as they’re old enough to breed and there would be no necessity for abortion. Until then, there will be abortion and if it’s not legal it will be done in back alleys and women will die along with the fetus. Would you and chuck be happy then?
By Lover
February 14, 2007 03:36 PM | Link to this
And speaking of not wanting to hear out the other side: Why do Libs constantly ascribe bad motivations to conservatives, and only good motivations to themselves? Never once have I heard a Lib say, “I understand where you’re coming from, here’s why I disagree.” Typically all you get is a lot of hysterical name calling and condescending, smug pronouncements of opinions that are apparently so self-evident they require no further explanation.
By lozen
February 14, 2007 03:38 PM | Link to this
I really don’t care either if you think I appear to be an irrational individual. But just for you here’s the post that has made sense today:
*By Chuck Anziulewicz February 14, 2007 09:41 AM | Link to this I am pro-choice for the following reasons: 1: Most Americans recognize that there is a moral and ethical distinction to be made between the termination of a pregnancy and the wanton killing of a living, breathing human being. 2: Most Americans know that while a woman’s fertilized egg or blastocyst is genetically “human,” the resemblance to a person ends there. 3: The vast majority of abortions take place within the first trimester of pregnancy, and most American still prefer that women still have that option. 4: The most emotional arguments against abortion hinge on religious beliefs: That a human pregnancy is somehow “sacred” or that a fertilized egg is imbued with some kind of “soul” or other supernatural characteristic. Since such relgious beliefs vary widely from person to person, all I can suggest is that pro-lifers are welcome to conduct their own reproductive lives as their conscience and religious beliefs dictate. They have absolutely NO right to demand that others do the same. 5: I consider a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy absolutely FUNDAMENTAL to her right to self-determination. PERIOD.
By ProWoman
February 14, 2007 03:39 PM | Link to this
Notice when the religious don’t like what you are telling them they write you off as irrational? It doesn’t matter how clear you spell it out they won’t ever hear you.
Chuck you are a caveman. Everything you posted on 3:11 is complete crap & is a typical male rant.
There is no such thing as a Forced pregnancy?? Women become pregnant through CHOICE or CARELESSNESS. ?????? So women are to remain sexless their whole lives unless they want to give birth. LOL I’ll make sure I let my husband know asap.
You’d better let all the rapists, date rapists, boyfriend & husband rapists know that they’re causing women to be careless & it’s the women making the choice to be forced to have sex.
I’ll bet you think an egg is a full grown bucket of Kentucky fried chicken too don’t you ! !
lol !
By Lover
February 14, 2007 03:43 PM | Link to this
I repeat, “Typically all you get is a lot of hysterical name calling and condescending, smug pronouncements of opinions that are apparently so self-evident they require no further explanation.”
Chuck you are a caveman. Everything you posted on 3:11 is complete crap & is a typical male rant.
By Liberal
February 14, 2007 03:45 PM | Link to this
pronouncements of opinions that are apparently so self-evident they require no further explanation.
Exactly. only low self-esteemers with too much ego have to run around and justify themselves to everybody.
By lozen
February 14, 2007 03:57 PM | Link to this
Yeah! It’s either you are a pawn of the devil or you’re irrational. Why do Libs constantly ascribe bad motivations to conservatives, and only good motivations to themselves? Never once have I heard a Lib say, “I understand where you’re coming from, here’s why I disagree. But you religious nut jobs are so open to hearing what liberals have to say, aren’t you? “Abortion is a moral issue!” “It is not a moral issue!” “It is.” “No, it is not.” “Yes, it is!” “No it is not.” “Yes it is; the bible says so.” “No it is not. Who cares what the bible says.” “You are just irrational.” Fool, take a look in the mirrow why don’t you?” Reminds me of #74 argument for the existence of god.
By Stir
February 14, 2007 03:57 PM | Link to this
It is a shame that women like these exist. All they do is fulfill the stereotype that we are the irrational and emotionally unstable gender of the two.
I would also expect more of the women on here to rise up against this behavior, no matter their position on the subject.
…on way out of blog until the crazies take their naps.
By Lover
February 14, 2007 03:59 PM | Link to this
Quick observation about self-esteem for you, Liberal. A study done a few years ago showed that the students who scored the highest on self-esteem assessments were those from Washington, D.C., while the students who scored the lowest were from North Dakota. In terms of actual scholastic achievement, however, the results were the exact opposite. The students from North Dakota scored the highest, while those from Washington, D.C. scored the lowest. Something to think about for those who are behind the “self-esteem” movement in education.
By kimberly
February 14, 2007 03:59 PM | Link to this
Why do righties think it’s good motivation to interfere with and restrict the personal lives, beliefs, and behaviors of individuals, but bad motivation to regulate and legislate things (like corporations for example) that affect thousands or millions of people, economies and the environments in which they operate?
By 2D
February 14, 2007 04:00 PM | Link to this
Lozen… You have again dodged my question. I can only assume that you do not want to display your opinion to the rest of us here. Not sure why that would be, if you are secure with your convictions.
I however will not dodge yours…
First, I would like to say, that I have in no way, shape or form made this out to be a religious issue. I don’t believe you can find anything I have written to show that I have. If you do not believe it is a moral issue, then you are sadly mistaken. Nearly EVERYTHING we legislate is a moral issue of some sort. Terminating a pregnancy is no exception.
I will not be happy until abortion is no longer necessary and will therefore no longer need to be legal except for the situation where the question being asked is “should I save the mortal life of the child or the mother?”.
Until that time, I am willing to make compromises with people like yourself to regulate this procedure. But compromise requires just that, people working together to find a place where the majority of parties can live with the decision even if they don’t entriely agree with it.
I know that we as a society have a long way to go for me to see my ultimate goals. Quite frankly, I’m not sure if I will experience it in my lifetime, but I can continue to try.
By Lover
February 14, 2007 04:03 PM | Link to this
lozen—I agree with your complaints about religious wackos. However, most conservatives don’t fall into that category.
By 2D
February 14, 2007 04:04 PM | Link to this
Lozen… I’m not sure if you want to purpot that 9:41 post as the one that has made the most sense today. It is full of supposition and contradiction. It sure is emphatic, however.
By chuck
February 14, 2007 04:05 PM | Link to this
How is it complete crap hooker? All I did was change a couple of words in YOUR SENTENCES. Anybody can SAY whatever they want to. Just because you say something you THINK it is a fact. It is nothing more than your OPINION. Based on your numerous rants this week, your opinions hold very little water my dear. Get over yourself. I do have to agree with you about one thing…the ORIGINAL versions of those statements were pure crap. I turned them into REALITY based statements.
By Nikita
February 14, 2007 04:10 PM | Link to this
First of all, if you cannot make your argument without resorting to name calling, then you have no argument.
As to why abortion is and should remain legal:
Beliefs regarding the existence of a soul are religious or spiritual in nature and vary from one individual to another. They are not a factual basis for legislation.
The actual precedes the potential — not least of which because none of us can know the destiny of the potential. Furthermore, in this case the actual is endowed with a basic right to privacy and a basic right to medical care.
I also have my own personal reasons why I believe that abortion is and must remain legal. Perhaps I’ll get into them later.
As to the basic question which we are all supposed to pontificating upon: No. All free speech, no matter how personally repugnant, tactical, or abusive in its execution, is equally protected.
By Lover
February 14, 2007 04:11 PM | Link to this
Why do righties think it’s good motivation to interfere with and restrict the personal lives, beliefs, and behaviors of individuals, but bad motivation to regulate and legislate things (like corporations for example) that affect thousands or millions of people, economies and the environments in which they operate?
Could you list some specific examples? That type of generalization is hard to answer as stated.
By Nikita
February 14, 2007 04:12 PM | Link to this
“Hooker?” Your opinion is now moot.
By 2D
February 14, 2007 04:13 PM | Link to this
Kimberly… I would actually argue that comparatively speaking, conservatives provide much more regulation and oversight to corporations than they do to personal lives.
Virtually every aspect of a corporation is scrutinized on a regular basis, where individuals basically live their lives free of government intervention, outside of filing taxes or getting a driver’s license. The number of illegals that live and thrive right here in Atlanta is proof of that. They are able to live and thrive becasue the government doesn’t come calling unless the individual gives the government a reason to come calling.
Most conservatives want to greatly restrict only one thing… Termination of pregnancy. A few more want to restrict the legal unions of same sex couples, but most only care about the issue as it pertains to anscillary things such as adoption and child custody. Other restrictions (i.e. drugs, alcohol, smoking) are restrictions that cross all political preferences.
By Lover
February 14, 2007 04:15 PM | Link to this
chcuk—I don’t think proWoman caught the fact that you simply repeated back her own statements to her in a tongue-in-cheek way. I respect her right to have her opinion, but it sure would be nice if she could explain herself in a way that addressed other’s concerns, not just her own.
By ProWoman
February 14, 2007 04:16 PM | Link to this
How is it complete crap hooker?
The words you choose when speaking to women proves what a caveman you are.
You mean nothing, you are nothing but a sexist terrorist as far as I’m concerned. How many times have you been arrested for domestic violence or having child porn on your computer?
You need to shut up now you man. You have no say so on this subject.
Go back to your church & go molest some more alter boys.
By Lover
February 14, 2007 04:19 PM | Link to this
Nikita—If you really believe in your actual/potential argument as the basis for thinking abortion is ok, then you should have no problem with infanticide as well, logically speaking. Also, your redefinition of an abortion as being benign “medical care” isn’t being honest.
By Jack
February 14, 2007 04:23 PM | Link to this
Hi Sweetness! SMOOCH! Just stopped by to say hey. Love to all. Keep up the good arguements, you got the blog smokin!
By Lover
February 14, 2007 04:24 PM | Link to this
What’s really crap, proWoman, is the belief you and the other Libs here share that morality should be left up to the individual. For example, why should chuck be arrested for beating up his wife or having child porn? After all, he might think those things are ok.
By 2D
February 14, 2007 04:27 PM | Link to this
Nikita… The position of terminating a pregnancy has no bearing on the existence of a “soul”. While some may take that route, the basic premise is really about whether or not terminating a pregnancy consitutes ending a human life.
I agree with you in your point about the actual preceding the potential and that is where the discussion can really become interesting. I don’t believe that anyone here, other maybe Lozen, has actually come close to saying it would be acceptable to end the life of a post-birth human being. So, the question to you Nikita is, At what point does a human life pass from “potential” to “actual”?
By Lover
February 14, 2007 04:32 PM | Link to this
Out of curiosity, proWoman, what are your thoughts about stepping in front of a moving bus? Mara has it worked out so that the bus will only hit you if you decide that it should. Very interesting view of reality.
By ProWoman
February 14, 2007 04:34 PM | Link to this
Lover-Loser, Abortion is not murder, it’s WOMAN’S medical issue. Not yours. PARTICULARLY not a man’s.
Infanticide is the killing of a baby. A fetus is not a baby. Lover-Loser, an egg is also not a chicken. A tad pole is not a frog. Men have no business deciding abortion.
Lover-loser, Chuck should be arrested for beating up his wife because his wife is a living person & it’s illegal to be a cave man now.
Now go away you sexist man. lol don’t you love his stupid name “LOVER’ eewww he must be sooo good in bed right? BLATH ! I’m sure the ladies are just lining up. lololol !
By Nikita
February 14, 2007 04:37 PM | Link to this
Nikita—If you really believe in your actual/potential argument as the basis for thinking abortion is ok, then you should have no problem with infanticide as well, logically speaking. Also, your redefinition of an abortion as being benign “medical care” isn’t being honest.
Wrong. There’s a huge difference between a self-sustaining individual and a collection of cells which cannot exist unless the woman within whom they chooses to nurture them and everything goes in that direction.
And as for medical care, there’s a reason why, regardless of its availability, that they will continue to ber performed. Because abortion is a legitimate medical procedure which is sometimes medically necessary. It’s not just an honest distinction, it’s a clinical one.
By Lover
February 14, 2007 04:38 PM | Link to this
2D—I have to disagree with you about the existence of a soul being unimportant to the discussion of abortion. Why else should we value human life, whether actual or potential, if we didn’t ascribe to it a Divine quality?
Remember, I am not making an argument here for Christianity, or any other religion. I define soul in strictly Scientific terms. It is the magical Gestalt which makes the whole greater than the sum of its parts, atomically speaking.
By Nikita
February 14, 2007 04:42 PM | Link to this
2D, thanks for the open response.
Nikita… The position of terminating a pregnancy has no bearing on the existence of a “soul”. While some may take that route, the basic premise is really about whether or not terminating a pregnancy consitutes ending a human life.
I was responding to Lover with the “soul” comment. As to whether it ends a human life, I would argue no. It ends a potential human life.
At what point does a human life pass from “potential” to “actual”?
I don’t feel comfortable making that call. Though certainly fetuses cease being viable up until birth.
By Lover
February 14, 2007 04:43 PM | Link to this
I’m sure the ladies are just lining up. lololol !
I never lacked for companionship over the years, proWoman, because I know what women want, and have always been willing to provide it. My challenge has always been finding a woman who is willing to reciprocate.
By Nikita
February 14, 2007 04:43 PM | Link to this
*Remember, I am not making an argument here for Christianity, or any other religion. I define soul in strictly Scientific terms. It is the magical Gestalt which makes the whole greater than the sum of its parts, atomically speaking. *
There’s nothing scientific about the magical gestalt.
By kimberly
February 14, 2007 04:44 PM | Link to this
The people who have no problem regulating MY uterus, or legislating which indigenous plants I can grow in my own back yard for my own use, or whether my gay neighbor can obtain a marriage license with the man he loves — all INDIVIDUAL, private issues, will scream bloody murder if the cost of complying with an environmental regulation causes their energy company stock to go down a quarter point. They screech about how “unfair” OSHA and minimum-wage requirements are, cause they restrict the “free market.”
Specific example: The Bankruptcy law passed in 2005, written by and for the credit industry which has been highly profitable for many years. This law creates greater restrictions on individuals for filing bankruptcy, and contains no exceptions or distinctions for those who lose everything due to medical or natural catastrophe (nearly 50%), and those who go apesh-t at Nordstrom. “Personal Accountability” they said. What about the Credit industry? If there WERE such a crisis, shouldn’t they be regulated to reduce the number of cards they send? Aren’t THEY responsible for their own irresponsible lending practices, and their own lapses in sound policy? Why NO, you see, they make money off preditory lending rates on bad risks. They make money, legally, off everything they do. They make enough to buy Congress into penalizing the young family whose kid needs a heart operation, while insuring their stock stays strong. Don’t believe me? Go read the details of the law that restricts individuals only, while giving corporations a pass.
By Lover
February 14, 2007 04:49 PM | Link to this
Oops, let me be more precise, 2D. Spirit is the intelligence which organizes our bodies. There’s no “scientific” reason why all those quadrillions of atoms would arrange themselves in the magical way required to create what we call life. Soul is what makes us sentient, that is have feelings. The Scientific basis for this depends on neural “feedback loops”, well explored in “Godel, Escher, Bach” by Douglas Hofstadter.
By Lover
February 14, 2007 04:53 PM | Link to this
There’s nothing scientific about the magical gestalt.
Many dim-witted Scientists have taken your position over the years, Nikita, e.g our own resident W2W boy-wonder, BC. However, to do so, you have to put on some really big blinders.
I note that you are uncomfortable making the call when life actually begins. Why is that? Is it because there really is no line?
By Nikita
February 14, 2007 04:57 PM | Link to this
Because I don’t presume to know such things. Nor, furthermore, do I think that any of you can know such things.
By Lover
February 14, 2007 04:58 PM | Link to this
Why NO, you see, they make money off preditory lending rates on bad risks. They make money, legally, off everything they do.
If that is your best example, I’m not buying your argument. Lending rates are a reflection of risk. If you did away with “predatory lending”, people with bad credit histories could never buy a car or house.
As for the new bankruptcy laws being heartless, give me a break. Under the old laws, people used bankruptcy as a strategy, not as a means of last resort.
By Lover
February 14, 2007 05:03 PM | Link to this
If you Libs really were as compassionate as you believe you are, you might understand that most folks who oppose abortion aren’t trying to give the expectant mother a hard time, i.e be a “Vagina Controller” as ProWoman so delicately put it. In my mind, they are showing respect for God’s Creation for wanting that baby to have the opportunity to live.
By kimberly
February 14, 2007 05:14 PM | Link to this
Just who was conress working for that year? Why, the very profitable Credit industsry with the big lobbyists, who were NOT regulated in any way by this law. BTW, Corporate bankruptcies were also not restricted. Good use of YOUR congressman’s time, eh?
Harvard University researchers found that the average out-of-pocket medical debt for those who filed for bankruptcy was $12,000. The study noted that 68 percent of those who filed for bankruptcy had health insurance. In addition, the study found that 50 percent of all bankruptcy filings were partly the result of medical expenses. Every 30 seconds in the United States someone files for bankruptcy in the aftermath of a serious health problem.
A lapse in health insurance coverage during the two years before filing was a strong predictor of a medical cause of bankruptcy. Nearly four-tenths (38.4 percent) of debtors who had a “major medical bankruptcy” had experienced a lapse, compared with 27.1 percent of debtors with no medical cause. Surprisingly, medical debtors were no less likely than other debtors to have coverage at the time of filing.
But try to reform the cracks in a health care system so many cannot aford, and you’re a “G-dd-mn Socialist!”
By ProWoman
February 14, 2007 05:16 PM | Link to this
“I never lacked for companionship over the years, proWoman, because I know what women want, and have always been willing to provide it. My challenge has always been finding a woman who is willing to reciprocate.”
lOVER-loser, I’m SURE you’ve just had women fighting to be in your charming company. How nice it must be to have sex with so many women !
I’m sure none of them ever “faked it” EITHER. lol
OK Lover-loser, you spout what a great lover you are, wonder how many women had to get abortions because of you? I’ll bet you never followed up on one of your “sex” dates to even find out if you got your date pregnant. HOW IMMORAL OF YOU TO HAVE SEX ! W******* ! PIG ! YOU SHOULDN’T BE HAVING SEX YOU ARE IRRISPONSIBLE & UNEDUCATED !
There’s probably a REALLY GOOD REASON you can’t find a woman that is willing to reciprocate.
ROFL ! !
By ProWoman
February 14, 2007 05:26 PM | Link to this
“God’s Creation for wanting that baby to have the opportunity to live.”
Cause that’s all that matters, birth. Nothing else after that.
SEE RELIGIOUS NUTS TRYING TO LEGISLATE THIER WACKY VIEWS ! It’s not a baby, it’s a fetus. A fetus is not a person yet. Only the woman gets to decide if she will grow a person or not.
What, too much power for a woman to have???
HA ! TOOOOOOOOO BAD !
That’s right, we be the maker of life, not God. Unless God is a woman, which is more likely.
Hey I agree that at some point the fetus becomes a baby. But since if I have an abortion it’s going to be as soon as I find out, that’s not an issue for me so I don’t know. I’m pretty sure you can’t get an abortion after a certain amount of time anyway unless there is a serious problem. So WTF is your problem? Your Peniz blood cutting off the circulation in your brain?
ROFL !
By annunci no mercenari con cell.
February 14, 2007 08:46 PM | Link to this
annunci no mercenari con cell. http://men-con.zukocele.info/memli/ memli men-con.zukocele.info/memli/ memli memli memli http://oubasdom.ibelgique.com/images/small/minerali-vari/ minerali vari e inerti per edilizia oubasdom.ibelgique.com/images/small/minerali-vari/ minerali vari e inerti per edilizia minerali vari e inerti per edilizia minerali vari e inerti per edilizia http://meldommon.ifrance.com/img/styles/coppia .htm coppia 24 meldommon.ifrance.com/img/styles/coppia .htm coppia 24 coppia 24 coppia 24 http://la-pulce.dysycadixa.info/luna-branduardi/ luna branduardi la-pulce.dysycadixa.info/luna-branduardi/ luna branduardi luna branduardi luna branduardi http://lumidee-sientelo.guxede.info/scene-sexy/ scene sexy grande fratello 5 lumidee-sientelo.guxede.info/scene-sexy/ scene sexy grande fratello 5 scene sexy grande fratello 5 scene sexy grande fratello 5 http://levanta-poeira.dysycadixa.info/lunarossa/ lunarossa levanta-poeira.dysycadixa.info/lunarossa/ lunarossa lunarossa lunarossa http://manolo-caracol.faqabe.info/marina-di/ marina di arbus manolo-caracol.faqabe.info/marina-di/ marina di arbus marina di arbus marina di arbus http://aklirik.ibelgique.com/images/small/annunci-no/ annunci no mercenari con cell. aklirik.ibelgique.com/images/small/annunci-no/ annunci no mercenari con cell. annunci no mercenari con cell. annunci no mercenari con cell.
By roberto vencato
February 14, 2007 08:46 PM | Link to this
roberto vencato http://akrelbo.ifrance.com/img/styles/mature-singoli.htm mature singoli akrelbo.ifrance.com/img/styles/mature-singoli.htm mature singoli mature singoli mature singoli http://chivarchi.ibelgique.com/images/small/doppie-penetrazioni/ doppie penetrazioni anali chivarchi.ibelgique.com/images/small/doppie-penetrazioni/ doppie penetrazioni anali doppie penetrazioni anali doppie penetrazioni anali http://letec5tca.ifrance.com/img/styles/coppia-un.htm coppia cerca un singolo letec5tca.ifrance.com/img/styles/coppia-un.htm coppia cerca un singolo coppia cerca un singolo coppia cerca un singolo http://rolbecli.ifrance.com/img/styles/cromature.htm cromature rolbecli.ifrance.com/img/styles/cromature.htm cromature cromature cromature http://oubasdom.ibelgique.com/images/small/noleggio-maxischermi/ noleggio maxischermi oubasdom.ibelgique.com/images/small/noleggio-maxischermi/ noleggio maxischermi noleggio maxischermi noleggio maxischermi http://viacco.ibelgique.com/images/small/elettricista-dino/ elettricista dino viacco.ibelgique.com/images/small/elettricista-dino/ elettricista dino elettricista dino elettricista dino http://www-trendonline.dysycadixa.info/lavabo-white/ lavabo white www-trendonline.dysycadixa.info/lavabo-white/ lavabo white lavabo white lavabo white http://dronvirel.ifrance.com/img/styles/roberto-vencato.htm roberto vencato dronvirel.ifrance.com/img/styles/roberto-vencato.htm roberto vencato roberto vencato roberto vencato
By roberto vencato
February 14, 2007 08:47 PM | Link to this
roberto vencato http://akrelbo.ifrance.com/img/styles/mature-singoli.htm mature singoli akrelbo.ifrance.com/img/styles/mature-singoli.htm mature singoli mature singoli mature singoli http://chivarchi.ibelgique.com/images/small/doppie-penetrazioni/ doppie penetrazioni anali chivarchi.ibelgique.com/images/small/doppie-penetrazioni/ doppie penetrazioni anali doppie penetrazioni anali doppie penetrazioni anali http://letec5tca.ifrance.com/img/styles/coppia-un.htm coppia cerca un singolo letec5tca.ifrance.com/img/styles/coppia-un.htm coppia cerca un singolo coppia cerca un singolo coppia cerca un singolo http://rolbecli.ifrance.com/img/styles/cromature.htm cromature rolbecli.ifrance.com/img/styles/cromature.htm cromature cromature cromature http://oubasdom.ibelgique.com/images/small/noleggio-maxischermi/ noleggio maxischermi oubasdom.ibelgique.com/images/small/noleggio-maxischermi/ noleggio maxischermi noleggio maxischermi noleggio maxischermi http://viacco.ibelgique.com/images/small/elettricista-dino/ elettricista dino viacco.ibelgique.com/images/small/elettricista-dino/ elettricista dino elettricista dino elettricista dino http://www-trendonline.dysycadixa.info/lavabo-white/ lavabo white www-trendonline.dysycadixa.info/lavabo-white/ lavabo white lavabo white lavabo white http://dronvirel.ifrance.com/img/styles/roberto-vencato.htm roberto vencato dronvirel.ifrance.com/img/styles/roberto-vencato.htm roberto vencato roberto vencato roberto vencato
By roberto vencato
February 14, 2007 08:48 PM | Link to this
roberto vencato http://akrelbo.ifrance.com/img/styles/mature-singoli.htm mature singoli akrelbo.ifrance.com/img/styles/mature-singoli.htm mature singoli mature singoli mature singoli http://chivarchi.ibelgique.com/images/small/doppie-penetrazioni/ doppie penetrazioni anali chivarchi.ibelgique.com/images/small/doppie-penetrazioni/ doppie penetrazioni anali doppie penetrazioni anali doppie penetrazioni anali http://letec5tca.ifrance.com/img/styles/coppia-un.htm coppia cerca un singolo letec5tca.ifrance.com/img/styles/coppia-un.htm coppia cerca un singolo coppia cerca un singolo coppia cerca un singolo http://rolbecli.ifrance.com/img/styles/cromature.htm cromature rolbecli.ifrance.com/img/styles/cromature.htm cromature cromature cromature http://oubasdom.ibelgique.com/images/small/noleggio-maxischermi/ noleggio maxischermi oubasdom.ibelgique.com/images/small/noleggio-maxischermi/ noleggio maxischermi noleggio maxischermi noleggio maxischermi http://viacco.ibelgique.com/images/small/elettricista-dino/ elettricista dino viacco.ibelgique.com/images/small/elettricista-dino/ elettricista dino elettricista dino elettricista dino http://www-trendonline.dysycadixa.info/lavabo-white/ lavabo white www-trendonline.dysycadixa.info/lavabo-white/ lavabo white lavabo white lavabo white http://dronvirel.ifrance.com/img/styles/roberto-vencato.htm roberto vencato dronvirel.ifrance.com/img/styles/roberto-vencato.htm roberto vencato roberto vencato roberto vencato
By video parle moi
February 14, 2007 08:48 PM | Link to this
video parle moi http://meldommon.ifrance.com/img/styles/lee-.htm lee ryan meldommon.ifrance.com/img/styles/lee-.htm lee ryan lee ryan lee ryan http://deltabas.ibelgique.com/images/small/black-knigt/ black knigt deltabas.ibelgique.com/images/small/black-knigt/ black knigt black knigt black knigt http://warelbec.ifrance.com/img/styles/da-cucina.htm da cucina warelbec.ifrance.com/img/styles/da-cucina.htm da cucina da cucina da cucina http://la-maschera.zidope.info/video-parle/ video parle moi la-maschera.zidope.info/video-parle/ video parle moi video parle moi video parle moi
By video parle moi
February 14, 2007 08:48 PM | Link to this
video parle moi http://meldommon.ifrance.com/img/styles/lee-.htm lee ryan meldommon.ifrance.com/img/styles/lee-.htm lee ryan lee ryan lee ryan http://deltabas.ibelgique.com/images/small/black-knigt/ black knigt deltabas.ibelgique.com/images/small/black-knigt/ black knigt black knigt black knigt http://warelbec.ifrance.com/img/styles/da-cucina.htm da cucina warelbec.ifrance.com/img/styles/da-cucina.htm da cucina da cucina da cucina http://la-maschera.zidope.info/video-parle/ video parle moi la-maschera.zidope.info/video-parle/ video parle moi video parle moi video parle moi
By video parle moi
February 14, 2007 08:49 PM | Link to this
video parle moi http://meldommon.ifrance.com/img/styles/lee-.htm lee ryan meldommon.ifrance.com/img/styles/lee-.htm lee ryan lee ryan lee ryan http://deltabas.ibelgique.com/images/small/black-knigt/ black knigt deltabas.ibelgique.com/images/small/black-knigt/ black knigt black knigt black knigt http://warelbec.ifrance.com/img/styles/da-cucina.htm da cucina warelbec.ifrance.com/img/styles/da-cucina.htm da cucina da cucina da cucina http://la-maschera.zidope.info/video-parle/ video parle moi la-maschera.zidope.info/video-parle/ video parle moi video parle moi video parle moi
By minwk kxvawu
February 14, 2007 11:37 PM | Link to this
bjhmtsakg thjrd ugei kzcu izjcv bvfy rfzohvbsx
By 2D
February 15, 2007 08:06 AM | Link to this
Lover… Please do not read too much into my excluding the concept of a “soul” from this debate. It is not that I do not believe we all have souls, b/c I do. I simply do not believe that the concept needs to be introduced in order to wage this debate.
In all actuality, I believe that this debate will be more productive if we conduct it with as few religious references as possible. That helps to keep all parties free from emotion and focused on fact. It also helps to keep people focused on the issue at hand, lost human lives, rather than religious bickering.
By 2D
February 15, 2007 08:35 AM | Link to this
Nikita… Thanks for your kind words. I do attempt to be open and civil and respectful of everyone. Sometimes that is not always the case. I wish I didn’t slip into the hateful tone of so many here and I truly apologize for it.
You indicated you “didn’t feel comfortable making that call” when responding to my original question, then followed with a very robotic answer about fetus viability. It sounded to me as if you have a very personal opinion, but do not want to share it. Not sure why, but I want to know what you personally believe.
The second response implies that a pregnant woman should have the right to terminate a pregnancy up to the actual time of birth, since that is the point in time a fetus becomes “viable”. I don’t really think you believe that. You seem far to thoughtful to believe that.
By Liberal
February 15, 2007 09:23 AM | Link to this
Quick observation about self-esteem for you, Liberal. A study done a few years ago showed that the students who scored the highest on self-esteem assessments were those from Washington, D.C., while the students who scored the lowest were from North Dakota. In terms of actual scholastic achievement, however, the results were the exact opposite. The students from North Dakota scored the highest, while those from Washington, D.C. scored the lowest. Something to think about for those who are behind the “self-esteem” movement in education.
so the point is beat everyone over the head so they do well in scholastic tests? I can only imagine the two educational systems mentioned might be quite different, not to mention religious bases(we all scum in the eyes of the Lord), but we get the implied displeasure with anything that might help self esteem in education, since it would not help scores on scholastic tests.
Or does beating everyone over the head make them more intelligent or at least inclined to try harder, trying to prove their self-worth to everyone, the original intent of my comment.
By 2D
February 15, 2007 10:10 AM | Link to this
ProWoman… Your continued rant “it’s not a human it’s a fetus” reminds of similar dehumanizing arguments made by folks in the deep South 150 years ago. At least they considered those non-humans 3/5 of a person for political reasons. You won’t even go that far.
By Nikita
February 15, 2007 10:12 AM | Link to this
What I really think? I think more or less what I said. I also believe that there are two different standards — what I would do, and what I believe others should be able to do.
First, as to my personal beliefs for myself — I am capable of caring for a child and therefore would probably not seek an abortion. However, there were times when that was not the case, and I would have sought one at that time. I also believe strongly in personal responsibility and self-reliance, and so I have worked to ensure that I have never had to make that decision. However, my resources are better than those of most people — I believe everyone should make responsible decisions, but it is our job as a society to help them do so.
As to my beliefs in general, I don’t believe that I am God. And therefore it is not my call to substitute my personal judgment for that of others. Legally and morally, I believe that is everyone’s individual burden — to make the decision that is appropriate to you within the framework of your privacy and basic right to self-determination. Which of course makes this a matter between you and your God or belief system or lack thereof.
I also happen to know a woman who miscarried at 6 months gestation prior to Roe v. Wade. Her story is heartbreaking, and it is the primary reason why I believe that placing the government in a position of scrutinizing women more heavily during pregnancy is wrong.
By Question
February 15, 2007 10:18 AM | Link to this
At least they considered those non-humans 3/5 of a person for political reasons. You won’t even go that far.
Constitutionallly, fetuses were not even considered in the census count. Why was that?
By ProWoman
February 15, 2007 10:46 AM | Link to this
Your continued rant “it’s not a human it’s a fetus” reminds of similar dehumanizing arguments made by folks in the deep South 150 years ago. At least they considered those non-humans 3/5 of a person for political reasons. You won’t even go that far.
sigh,again, non-whites in the south 150 years ago were people being discriminated against just because of color. Anybody calling them non-humans was just being ignorant & mean.
A fetus is not a person until a woman decides to grow it into one.
A woman is the only one that gets to decide whether or not to create a person. She doesn’t need to justify her reasons to anybody except HERSELF. Sounds like you religious freaks want to enslave the wombs of all women. How nice sounds like your religion is a barrel of fun !
By Stir
February 15, 2007 11:28 AM | Link to this
How nice sounds like your religion is a barrel of fun !
A fetus is not a person until a woman decides to grow it into one.
Get an education, and also learn to form a sentence, before using your ghetto-speak to make statements for the rest of us women.
You make us sound stupid.
By ProWoman
February 15, 2007 12:11 PM | Link to this
Oh Stir give me a break. Just because you don’t like a woman standing up for herself, is that the best you can come up with? EWWW my writing isn’t perfect ON A BLOG ! Boy you got me on that one I’m so ashamed lol.
for the rest of us women? US women? Get an education yourself. No, wait, education isn’t encouraged in religion. You’re supposed to get married young & only breed, cook, clean & service your much older husband.
ROFL !
By ProWoman
February 15, 2007 12:18 PM | Link to this
ok how’s this?
A fetus is not a person till a woman makes the choice to grow it inside her body. Thus in 9 months creating a person. Key word is “choice”. Key word is “her body” SHE creates the new person. SHE is doing all the creating. A fetus is not yet a person. A less 1 inch group of cells is not yet a person.
If you can’t read please find someone who can. They can read it out loud to you.
By Barbaro
February 15, 2007 12:34 PM | Link to this
This just in -
Several people have reported that the remains of Barbaro have been exhumed by the bloggers on the W2W blog. The sources went on to say that the bloggers have been repeatedly punching and kicking the once great Kentucky Derby winner.
By Lover
February 15, 2007 01:55 PM | Link to this
In all actuality, I believe that this debate will be more productive if we conduct it with as few religious references as possible. That helps to keep all parties free from emotion and focused on fact. It also helps to keep people focused on the issue at hand, lost human lives, rather than religious bickering.
2D—As I have stated many times, I am not religious. I’m sorry that referencing the terms spirit and soul evokes images of supernatural beings. I don’t define these terms in any supernatural way. By leaving these important concepts out of the discussion, however, you lose your basis for believing that human life (really all Life) is special, magical, precious.
By Stir
February 15, 2007 01:57 PM | Link to this
A less 1 inch group of cells is not yet a person.
The message is garbled, but I am beginning to believe that is a good thing.
Plus, I do not belong to an organized religion and I believe in pro-choice. What I do not believe in is stupid women like you speaking for the rest of us in the trashy way you do.
It comes down to you being just too dumb to have a debate.
By FoodFor
February 15, 2007 02:00 PM | Link to this
Barbaro was such a high falutin stud he never even got any.
By Lover
February 15, 2007 02:02 PM | Link to this
OK Lover-loser, you spout what a great lover you are, wonder how many women had to get abortions because of you? I’ll bet you never followed up on one of your “sex” dates to even find out if you got your date pregnant.
ProWoman, not that I expect you to believe me, but my track record is clean: No kids, no pregnancies, no abortions. In addition, I have never struck a woman, threatened a woman, or intimidated a woman. I don’t have anonymous “sex dates”, I believe in committed relationships.
By lozen
February 15, 2007 02:05 PM | Link to this
*By Lover February 14, 2007 01:00 PM | Link to this I find it incredible that lozen doesn’t believe that a fetus has a soul. By the Biblical definition, a fetus has both a soul and a spirit. Kill the fetus if you like, but know that you extinguished a soul and a spirit…. *
Oh yeah. It’s not religious all right!
By Lover
February 15, 2007 02:08 PM | Link to this
Also, ProWoman, please tell what’s-her-name that a pity party wasn’t in my plans. I was thinking more along the lines of a lifetime of mutual respect and admiration. I was thinking about walks together in the park, holding hands and feeling like teenagers again. Exciting trips to the casino. Passionate midnight interludes. Quiet times just reading. Lots of time in our special “herb garden” out back. More along those lines.
By Lover
February 15, 2007 02:12 PM | Link to this
Plus, I do not belong to an organized religion and I believe in pro-choice. What I do not believe in is stupid women like you speaking for the rest of us in the trashy way you do.
Stir—It’s pretty amazing what limited imaginations some of these Libs have. If you don’t buy their “Life is meaningless” argument, then that automatically makes you a religious nut who wants to make abortion illegal.
By Lover
February 15, 2007 02:18 PM | Link to this
lozen—I referenced the Bible for the definitions of soul and spirit only because the Biblical writers did a good job of defining these important ideas. You might think that rejecting the Bible out of hand makes you more intelligent, but I don’t see it that way. You don’t have to believe in a “literal Bible” in order to bring the Books into the discussion, or the ideas they contain.
By purchase tramadol
February 15, 2007 02:21 PM | Link to this
Kiss you! I think this is the best site in the net I have ever visited! Really, very nice site. I check it regularly! tramadol | diazepam drug | buy generic ultram | fioricet | somas and hydrocodone prescriptions online http://www.gbwelt.de/gb.php?id=zebran http://www.gbwelt.de/gb.php?id=saakovich http://www.gbwelt.de/gb.php?id=xigra http://www.gbwelt.de/gb.php?id=oblin
By Lover
February 15, 2007 02:23 PM | Link to this
SHE is doing all the creating. A fetus is not yet a person.
I wonder if ProWoman realizes what an arrogant statement this is. Sorry, ProWoman, you didn’t “create” the eggs and sperm which unite to form a new life, no more than you “created” your own body. Personally, I find it sad that you have such a horrible view of Life. Learn some respect, will you?
By ProWoman
February 15, 2007 02:33 PM | Link to this
OH Lover I misunderstood your name. Much better meaning ! lol And yes I believe you. : )
Stir just because I stand up for women’s choice & not always type correctly due to multi-tasking around here does not make me stupid. I speak for most women. The majority. The rest are religous women who I do not speak for because they aren’t allowed to have any opinion at all.
By 2D
February 15, 2007 02:40 PM | Link to this
ProWoman… First of all, please keep the religious barbs out of your responses to me. I have not used religion as any justification for the positions I put forth.
Second, of course we know that Southern slaves were abused and dehumanized people, but the rhetoric you used to dehumanize unborn children evokes images of the same rhetoric used by slave owners of 150 years ago. Perhaps 150 years from now, our society will have advanced to humanize the unborn in the same fashion.
BTW… By your rationale, you would allow a woman to freely terminate a pregnancy at seven, eight, even nine months. I can’t believe that you would be so cold and heartless as to allow that. If so, I pray that God would ease your hardened heart. There, that is my one religious moment of the day.
By Lover
February 15, 2007 02:41 PM | Link to this
OH Lover I misunderstood your name. Much better meaning ! lol And yes I believe you. : )
ProWoman, I grew up in a house full of women—4 sisters and a Mom. On my mother’s side of the family, the women always dominated (although not my mom). I’ve had many wonderful relationships with women, as long as 7 years. I’m crazy for you guys!!!
By kimberly
February 15, 2007 02:50 PM | Link to this
HAPPY BIRF’DAY 72JOHN!!!!
It’s your birthday! It’s your birtday! Lalalalala! Happy Birthday! Happy Birthday! Lalalalalalala!
By Lover
February 15, 2007 02:50 PM | Link to this
ProWoman—So you know, I know where you are coming from in your defense of “women’s rights”. For most of the History of the World, women have been relegated to second-class citizenship. That is wrong, and we need to eternally vigilant that we don’t backslide. I also understand that the pioneers of the “Women’s Movement” had to be strong and uncompromising in order to be victorious. However, the War is over, at least here in the US. But, rather than accepting that things have changed, you continue to harp back to a world which no longer exists. By doing so, you harm the credibility of the Women’s Movement, in the same way that the old horses of the Civil Rights Movement do more harm than good these days.
By Lover
February 15, 2007 02:55 PM | Link to this
2D—You don’t seem to be responding to me much, but in your mind, why should we value Life? From an “atomic” standpoint, our carbon and hydrogen atoms wouldn’t appear to have any reason to organize in the magical way that they do, and if they are “disarranged”, that should be no big deal, right?
By Lover
February 15, 2007 03:01 PM | Link to this
*HAPPY BIRF’DAY 72JOHN!!!!
It’s your birthday! It’s your birtday! Lalalalala! Happy Birthday! Happy Birthday! Lalalalalalala!*
Hey, thirty-five and still alive!! Don’t get too trashed tonight, 72John.
P.S. It’s always wonderful when what’s-her-name is in a good mood.
By ProWoman
February 15, 2007 03:04 PM | Link to this
I can’t believe that you would be so cold and heartless as to allow that. If so, I pray that God would ease your hardened heart. There, that is my one religious moment of the day.
I doubt it’s your last if your thought process is based on anything religious.
When did I EVER say I’d be for a late term abortion unless there’s a danger to the woman or there’s a medical problem with the fetus?? Who performs late term abortions for no reason anyway?
Slaves were grown human beings. Not fetus’s, not eggs or seeds. grown living, breathing, people.
That’s like saying Fish at the GA Aquarium are the same as Capt. Crunch cereal.
Lover, 4 sisters? awww where were u in that family line? I’ll bet that was a crazy house for you lol.
Now Lover, If a fertilized egg is implanted in me & one in you, who do you think is going to grow a baby me or you? So yes I can create if i choose to. Just like you can’t make a cake without the right ingredients, but it’s not cake unless somebody bakes it. Unless somebody bakes it it’s just a blob.
Maybe in the future you pro-fetus types can take all the aborted fetus’s & grow them in your own ovens. Hey you never know science could invent something like that ! Then you can breed all ya want to. Trick is you have to pay for & take care of all those fetus’s you grow yourself.
By Lover
February 15, 2007 03:10 PM | Link to this
over, 4 sisters? awww where were u in that family line? I’ll bet that was a crazy house for you lol.
Well, let’s just say my “education” began at an early age. I asked my Mom at age 5 what a “period” was. She explained things in a straightforward, but beautiful way. She said “Every month, a woman’s body gets ready to have a baby. If she doesn’t, then her body gets rid of the extra blood needed to prepare for the baby.”
P.S. I was #4 out of 5 children. How about you, ProWoman?
By Lover
February 15, 2007 03:13 PM | Link to this
Also, ProWoman—I understand your view that a fetus is not a “human” because it is not fully formed yet. Can you understand how others may have a different view? Can you find it in your heart to respect the other view?
By NowYouAllKnow
February 15, 2007 03:14 PM | Link to this
Know you all know the anti-abortion training manual, page 3 thereabouts, now instructs religious Pro-Lifers to never use religion as part of their anti-abortion argument.
By Lover
February 15, 2007 03:26 PM | Link to this
My biggest prayer for what’s-her-name is that she understands one day WHY men and women fight. It’s actually part of our basic biology. Part of the mating ritual is arousal of the male, which the female accomplishes by being flamboyant. Done in a fun, healthy way, “fighting” can be great. Unfortunately, insecure people have difficulty keeping it on a “fun” level, and wind up hurting one another.
By Nikita
February 15, 2007 03:36 PM | Link to this
Lover, I think you have some significant gall in asking that people like myself respect your beliefs. I am already doing that — but when are you going to respect my basic rights to self-determination and privacy?
By ProWoman
February 15, 2007 03:38 PM | Link to this
Can you understand how others may have a different view? Can you find it in your heart to respect the other view?
ABSOLUTELY. Unfortunately the Anti-choice only want their view as law. That’s the beauty of choice. If you aren’t for abortion don’t have one.
The Women’s rights fight is far from over. That’s another topic altogether.
One of the rights Women will have to continue to fight for is Abortion rights. Birth control & access to birth control and yes it is a right. Safe affective birth control is a must for all females. Why in this day of such technology is birth control so bad? The religious right is behind every effort to make birth control & women’s reproductive health a burden & unsafe. Take this new shot avail that prevents most cerivcal cancer. The religious wacks’s argument is that if young girls get this shot they’ll have sex. Are you kidding me??? That’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. That shot would prevent cancer.
The anti choice are constantly picking away anything they can to restrict a woman’s sexuality. Don’t teach sex ed ! Don’t make birth control avail to kids ! Protest abortion clinincs that also give full reproductive healthcare ! Allow pharamcists to not give out birth control pills ! It’s never ending because religious nutcases won’t ever leave women alone.
A woman’s quality of life, health & mental well being does matter. Gestating a fetus to birth & the responsibility, Physical toll & financial responsibility ultimately falls on the woman. Women deserve more choices & birth control options & unfortunately nobody’s going to do anything unless we demand it.
By ProWoman
February 15, 2007 03:44 PM | Link to this
I was #4 out of 5 children. How about you, ProWoman?
2nd out of 2. Big brother mean as hail when we were little, fine when he was around 17 or so. We laugh about it now. lol
By Stir
February 15, 2007 03:48 PM | Link to this
Stir just because I stand up for women’s choice & not always type correctly due to multi-tasking around here does not make me stupid.
It is your crass remarks and ignorance that make you look stupid.
I speak for most women. The majority. The rest are religous women who I do not speak for because they aren’t allowed to have any opinion at all.
I know you really believe that you speak for most women. That is what is so scary. It is also what makes you look even more stupid than the ghetto speak.
Also, I do not know of any pro-woman’s organization that would let you speak for them. They would be ashamed - you really should ponder that for your own development, but probably are unable.
By Lover
February 15, 2007 04:03 PM | Link to this
but when are you going to respect my basic rights to self-determination and privacy?
Nikita, privacy and self-determination are great when you are dealing with issues which only affect yourself. People who are pro-abortion premise their arguments on the idea that a fetus is not really human, maybe not even “alive”. As such, you can then “categorize” abortion as being just one more benign “medical procedure”. I respectfully disagree with this outlook, and believe that a deeper analysis of the moral issues supports my view that all Life is precious.
By kimberly
February 15, 2007 04:07 PM | Link to this
Legislation has been proposed in Tennessee that would require death certificates for aborted fetuses, which would then be filed as public records. I’m completely lost as to how one could request a death certificate for something that never got a birth certificate. What’s not lost on me, however, is the motivation: “Can’t make it illegal yet, but we can harass women by removing their privacy, while keeping a good count on the baby killers in our respective communities… you know, in case we need to burn crosses in their front yards, or fire shotguns randomly into their kitchen windows.”
By Lover
February 15, 2007 04:10 PM | Link to this
ProWoman—I’m glad we had the chance to “chat” today. I think you are a good person, a sincere person. If I challenge your viewpoint, please know that I am just trying to understand you better—and myself in the process. I’m different from many people in that I like to strip away the surface elements of every argument in order to expose the premises the argument is based upon. Then, it is possible to compare the value judgments and opinions that lead a person to select a particular premise. To me, that is real communication. Simply stating and debating conclusions is a waste of time to me, because no one ever changes their viewpoint as a result.
By Lover
February 15, 2007 04:15 PM | Link to this
What’s not lost on me, however, is the motivation: “Can’t make it illegal yet, but we can harass women by removing their privacy, while keeping a good count on the baby killers in our respective communities…
I can’t speak for the folks in Tennessee, but perhaps it is to keep abortion legal, but attach a stigma to it, that is make it taboo. If that is the case, then this particular legislation would miss the mark because it opens the door for harrassment as whats-(oh, never mind)said. While the idea of something being legal, yet taboo, escapes many people, I understand the concept.
By ProWoman
February 15, 2007 04:19 PM | Link to this
Stir you only critisize my debating & opinions because you can’t handle a woman with an opinion. You can’t control me. Calling me stupid won’t shut me up or any other woman & yes most all women are pro-choice. Most all women don’t want the govt or religious groups making reproductive or medical decisions for them.
Women controlling thier own health & destiny is stupid to you obviously.
Women’s lives are precious. Real live living breathing, walking, talking, working, loving & yes sexual woman are precious. They are still precious even if they don’t want to be a breeding machine.
Only a stupid person would use the term “ghetto speak” lol
By NowYouKnow
February 15, 2007 04:19 PM | Link to this
you know, in case we need to burn crosses in their front yards, or fire shotguns randomly into their kitchen windows.
You know good and well that a culture that for centuries has demonstrated complete respect for others would never do such a thing.
By kimberly
February 15, 2007 04:21 PM | Link to this
I have no problem with someone thinking that “all life is precious.” My problem is with people who try to establish a separate set of legal rights for an entity that is NOT separate, and to give that separate set of rights priority over the rights of the primary, pre-existing entity. Does the law apply this absurd principle anywhere else? If so, please do tell! If not, then I believe it’s a dangerous precedent to set.
By Stir
February 15, 2007 04:25 PM | Link to this
ProWoman,
You are obviously lost. I did not address most of what you assert is my point. That tells me you just like to yell and get attention.
You are a very weak woman, compared to the ones I know, and I hope you get help.
Yawn.
By Lover
February 15, 2007 04:27 PM | Link to this
Also—In response to the charge that I am manipulative, I plead guilty. The real question, is do I manipulate things for good purpose, or bad?
P.S. It takes one to know one.
By Lover
February 15, 2007 04:30 PM | Link to this
Does the law apply this absurd principle anywhere else? If so, please do tell! If not, then I believe it’s a dangerous precedent to set.
If you recall, one of the two issues I felt applied to abortion is the observation the pregnancy is unique in that two souls inhabit the same body for 9 months. So, no, this principle doesn’t apply anywhere else.
By proWoman
February 15, 2007 04:33 PM | Link to this
Thanks Lover : )
Legislation has been proposed in Tennessee that would require death certificates for aborted fetuses, which would then be filed as public records.
You’re kidding me, that’s idiotic. More waste of Govt money. WTF nobody should be allowed to harrass anybody for a medical procedure. What’s next protesting women who get sterilized? I can’t believe Tn govt would allow this at all. Wonder what the taxpayers think of that? So are they planning on making women who miscarriage get this waste of paper? or is it just for abortions? Idiots.
Why aren’t they posting on a state website photos, names & addresses of all men who are taking viagra?
Why not start holding funeral’s for sperm? Religious nuts can hold candle light prayers outside of all the strip clubs & porn shops.
By Lover
February 15, 2007 04:34 PM | Link to this
kimberly—If I stopped being creepy by asking nosy questions, can I still have your permission to care about you?? You don’t have to meet me for coffee or do anything at all to please me, I’ll still care about you just the same.
By Lover
February 15, 2007 04:39 PM | Link to this
Here’s my theory about relationships, for anyone who is interested: The success of a relationship comes down to expectations, and whether the individual expectations of each person are being met, or at least being addressed in a respectful way. Problems begin when expectations aren’t met, and no compromise can be reaches. The greatest difficulty is many people aren’t honest about their expectations, or are unable to clearly articulate what their expectations are.
By Nikita
February 15, 2007 04:40 PM | Link to this
Well, Lover, I respectfully suggest you reexamine your ideas, because they’re not logically consistent.
A) Privacy and self-determination are easy rights to renounce when you wouldn’t be the one losing them. B) Oh, really? In what other cases would you choose to keep citizens from being able to exercise their basic rights to privacy and self-determination?
*People who are pro-abortion premise their arguments on the idea that a fetus is not really human, maybe not even “alive”. *
I didn’t. I said I don’t make that call and since you are not God, neither do you.
I respectfully disagree with this outlook, and believe that a deeper analysis of the moral issues supports my view that all Life is precious.
What life would that be? We euthanize millions of dogs and cats every year, so you must have meant human life. But I don’t even see any support for humans in general — just the genetic material that may become a child if it reaches 9 months of gestation and the conditions are right. Never mind the resulting children and the adults who live in our society and deserve the same basic protections regardless of age, money, gender, or reproductive status.
By Nikita
February 15, 2007 04:43 PM | Link to this
women who miscarriage get this waste of paper? or is it just for abortions? Idiots.
In most states, yes. But they don’t necessarily get birth certificates.
By Lover
February 15, 2007 04:45 PM | Link to this
My reasons for being attracted to kimberly:
(1) She is smart as a whip, and very creative.
(2) She is a good-hearted person who truly cares for others.
(3) She has the rare combination of being a professional person who also likes to party. Usually you only get one or the other.
(4) She appears to have a lusty appetite for romance. It takes a lot to match mine.
By Lover
February 15, 2007 04:50 PM | Link to this
What life would that be? We euthanize millions of dogs and cats every year, so you must have meant human life.
Well, I can’t answer for others, but let me tell you how I treat my bunny rabbits. Each of them has their own two-story bunny condo, 4’ by 8’. They get a five course meal twice a day, with all the perfect ingredients to keep them healthy. I spent thousands of dollars fencing in my backyard so they can exercise in safety. In the winter, I keep my back door open so they can come and go freely, even though it raises my heating bills.
By Lover
February 15, 2007 04:54 PM | Link to this
But, hope springs eternally. If kim isn’t the one, there has to be a special lady somewhere who I can shower with love.
By Calgary Escorts
February 15, 2007 05:31 PM | Link to this
calgary escorts review http://www.escort-24.info/calgary-escorts-review.html - calgary escorts review calgary escorts review [URL=http://www.escort-24.info/calgary-escorts-review.html]calgary escorts review[/URL] [LINK=http://www.escort-24.info/calgary-escorts-review.html]calgary escorts review[/LINK]
By Calgary Escorts
February 15, 2007 05:33 PM | Link to this
calgary escorts review http://www.escort-24.info/calgary-escorts-review.html - calgary escorts review calgary escorts review [URL=http://www.escort-24.info/calgary-escorts-review.html]calgary escorts review[/URL] [LINK=http://www.escort-24.info/calgary-escorts-review.html]calgary escorts review[/LINK]
By Free ringtones
February 15, 2007 07:10 PM | Link to this
Largest Selection of FREE Ringtones Free ringtones [url=http://freeringtones.forumup.us/]Free ringtones[/url] http://freeringtones.forumup.us/
By Free ringtones
February 15, 2007 07:26 PM | Link to this
Largest Selection of FREE Ringtones Free ringtones [url=http://freeringtones.forumup.us/]Free ringtones[/url] http://freeringtones.forumup.us/
By group sex
February 15, 2007 07:47 PM | Link to this
group sex movies http://trapseafood.com/group-sexy-usa.html - group sex movies group sex movies [URL=http://trapseafood.com/group-sexy-usa.html]group sex movies[/URL] [LINK=http://trapseafood.com/group-sexy-usa.html]group sex movies[/LINK]
By group sex
February 15, 2007 07:48 PM | Link to this
group sex movies http://trapseafood.com/group-sexy-usa.html - group sex movies group sex movies [URL=http://trapseafood.com/group-sexy-usa.html]group sex movies[/URL] [LINK=http://trapseafood.com/group-sexy-usa.html]group sex movies[/LINK]
By lozen
February 16, 2007 10:17 AM | Link to this
Oh, you want to have a vasectomy? Sorry, guys but you have to get a death certificate for all those potential persons you’re killing! I have seen the results of a first trimester abortion. It is a blob of tissue and bears no resemblance to a human being. I have seen the results of an abortion performed at approx. five months. That freaked me out. However, when I talked to the woman who had that abortion (she really didn’t know how far along she was) it became obvious that she did what was best for herself and the potential child in her circumstances! It is so easy to judge other people, isn’t it?
By SexualityArticle
February 16, 2007 10:23 AM | Link to this
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/susanjacoby/2007/02/thereiwaslooking_forward.html
By Mara
February 16, 2007 10:25 AM | Link to this
it IS “Joke Friday” but unfortunately for Georgia education, these folks are perfectly serious!
http://www.ajc.com/blogs/content/shared-blogs/ajc/georgia/entries/2007/02/15/antievolution_m.html
The Anti-Defamation League is calling on state Rep. Ben Bridges to apologize for a memo distributed under his name that says the teaching of evolution should be banned in public schools because it is a religious deception stemming from an ancient Jewish sect.
Bridges (R-Cleveland) denies having anything to do with the memo. But one of his constituents [Marshall Hall] said he wrote the memo with Bridges’ approval before it was recently distributed to lawmakers in several states, including Texas, California, New York, Illinois, Pennsylvania and Ohio.
———snip——-
Bridges acknowledged that he talked to Hall about filing legislation this year that would end the teaching of evolution in Georgia’s public schools. Bridges said the views in the memo belong to Hall, though Bridges said he doesn’t necessarily disagree with them.
“I agree with it more than I would the Big Bang Theory or the Darwin Theory,” Bridges said. “I am convinced that rather than risk teaching a lie why teach anything?”
——-snip————
{text}
“Indisputable evidence — long hidden but now available to everyone — demonstrates conclusively that so-called ‘secular evolution science’ is the Big-Bang 15-billion-year alternate ‘creation scenario’ of the Pharisee Religion,” the memo says. “This scenario is derived concept-for-concept from Rabbinic writings in the mystic ‘holy book’ Kabbala dating back at least two millennia.”
The memo calls on lawmakers to introduce legislation that would end the teaching of evolution in public schools because it is “a deception that is causing incalculable harm to every student and every truth-loving citizen.”
It also directs readers to a Web site www.fixedearth.com, which includes model legislation that calls the Kabbala “a mystic, anti-Christ ‘holy book’ of the Pharisee Sect of Judaism.” The Web site also declares “the earth is not rotating … nor is it going around the sun.”
By Chilao
February 16, 2007 10:26 AM | Link to this
Every sperm is sacred, and they are even mobile, with movement. I wonder if they have less evolved or more evolved souls, compared to animals. LOL
By lozen
February 16, 2007 11:49 AM | Link to this
Chilao, ROTFLMAO! You are too much!
By Reynard
February 16, 2007 12:01 PM | Link to this
I think the entire planet is overpopulated and you are wasting your time trying to save every baby. They just grow up and have even more babies. The political right won’t talk about over population because they believe all the Biblical crap and the left is afraid to tell the poor and down trodden Democrats to stop having too many kids.
By Chilao
February 16, 2007 12:07 PM | Link to this
I have since considered, in the same vein as our own left brain/right brain aspect, and in fact that might come from this, that each sperm may really only be 1/2 a soul, the other 1/2 within the female’s egg, and only once joined does a full soul occur. Just a thought, on a Joke Friday.
By Chilao
February 16, 2007 12:33 PM | Link to this
Do you guys know how to make a dead baby float?….two scoops of ice cream and two scoops of dead baby! Whats hot and bubbly and beats on glass?? A baby in a microwave… Whats easier to unload a truck load of bowling balls or a truck load of dead babies??? Dead babies, you can use a pitch fork
By InTheNews
February 16, 2007 12:33 PM | Link to this
I will not vote for anyone that I feel is a risk to BC control or Abortion access. I will not compromise on this issue.
I’m all for birth control. It’s the only thing we have to ensure that we women can enjoy sex and not pay for it dearly.
Look what I found:
Representative Louise Slaughter (D-NY) reintroduced the Prevention First Act in the House on Monday. This bill, which was not acted on the last congress, is designed to increase access to both contraception and comprehensive sex education and reduce the number of unintended pregnancies in the US. The bill, which was introduced in the Senate by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) in early January, is now in committee in both Houses.
The legislation would increase funds for the National Family Planning Program (known as Title X) and for Medicaid Family Planning Services. The bill would also end insurance discrimination against women, spread awareness about emergency contraception, provide rape victims with free emergency contraception, and require medically accurate information in federally funded sex education programs.
“I am proud to reintroduce this bill which serves as an innovative and comprehensive approach to protecting women’s reproductive health, decreasing the spread of STDs, and reducing the number of unintended pregnancies,” Rep. Slaughter said of the bill in a Senate press release. “If we want to reduce the number of abortions in this country, the methodology is clear — empower women to prevent unintended pregnancies through education and access to contraception.”
By Nikita
February 16, 2007 12:34 PM | Link to this
But, hope springs eternally. If kim isn’t the one, there has to be a special lady somewhere who I can shower with love.
A special lady made of plastic, I suspect.
By Jack
February 16, 2007 12:40 PM | Link to this
Last week was my birthday and I didn’t feel very well waking up
that morning. I went downstairs for breakfast hoping my wife would be pleasant and say, “Happy Birthday!”, and possibly have a present for me. As it turned out, she barely said good morning, let alone “Happy Birthday.” I thought… Well, that’s marriage for you, but the kids will remember. My kids came in to breakfast and didn’t say a word. So when I left for the office, I felt pretty low and somewhat despondent. As I walked into my office, my secretary Jane said, “Good Morning Boss, Happy Birthday!” It felt a little better that at least someone had remembered. I worked until one o’clock and then Jane knocked on my door and said, “You know, it’s such a beautiful day outside, and it’s your birthday, let’s go out to lunch, just you and me.” I said, “Thanks Jane, that’s the greatest thing I’ve heard all day. Let’s go!” We went to lunch. But we didn’t go where we normally would go. We dined instead at a little place with a private table. We had two martinis each and I enjoyed the meal tremendously. On the way back to the office, Jane said, “You know, it’s such a beautiful day..We don’t need to go back to the office, do we?” I responded, “I guess not. What do you have in mind?” She said, “Let’s go to my apartment.” After arriving at her apartment, Jane turned to me and said, “Boss, if you don’t mind, I’m going to step into the bedroom for a moment. I’ll be right back.” “Ok.” I nervously replied. She went into the bedroom and, after a couple of minutes, she came out carrying a huge birthday cake .. Followed by my wife, kids, and dozens of my friends and co-workers, all singing “Happy Birthday”. And I just sat there… On the couch.. Naked
By Industry Representative
February 16, 2007 12:45 PM | Link to this
We resent the characterization of our “Your Personal Lady” products as plastic. Great strides have been made in recent years in the production of life-like skin substitutes, and all of our Affection Surrogates are made of these space age polymers.
Please refrain from using such innacuracies in the future.
By lozen
February 16, 2007 12:47 PM | Link to this
There’s one american indian tribe who believe that the whole soul comes from the woman. In their creation myth, men inhabited the earth and were uncivilized wild animals with no soul and little more intelligence than apes. Women who lived above in the heavens, and were much more advanced, saw these wild creatures and, taking pity on them, came down to earth to teach them how to be human. They taught them how to make fire, how to worship, how to dance, how to build shelter, how to respect the seasons, how to weave, how to speak, how to make music. The wild men became more civilized. Then it was time for the women to return. The men somehow trick the women into closing the opening back to their heavenly home and keep them on earth. That’s why women and men are so different, they believe.
By Chilao
February 16, 2007 12:49 PM | Link to this
the baby float joke was not me. a-h
By MrRogers
February 16, 2007 12:55 PM | Link to this
there goes the neighborhood.
By lozen
February 16, 2007 01:04 PM | Link to this
Jack I am so sorry that happened to you. Where are you living now Jack? Back under the bridge again?
By Jack
February 16, 2007 01:05 PM | Link to this
Some for the ladies:
> >
One day my housework-challenged husband decided to washhis Sweat-shirt. Seconds after he stepped into the laundry room, he shouted to me, “What setting do I use on the washing machine?”
"It depends," I replied. "What does it say on your shirt?" He yelled back, "University of Oklahoma." And they say blondes are dumb... > A couple is lying in bed. The man says, "I am going to make you the happiest woman in the world." The woman replies, "I'll miss you..." --------------------------------------------- "It's just too hot to wear clothes today," Jack says ashe
"Probably that I married you for your money," she replied. --------------------------------------------- He said - Shall we try swapping positions tonight? She said - That's a good idea... you stand by the ironingstepped out of the shower, “honey, what do you think the neighbors would think if I mowed the lawn like this?”
board while I sit on the sofa and fart. ——————————————————————- Q: What do you call an intelligent, good looking, sensitive man?
A: A rumor --------------------------------------------- A man and his wife, now in their 60's, were celebratingtheir 40th wedding anniversary. On their special day a good fairy came to them and said that because they had been so good that each one of them could have one wish.
The wife wished for a trip around the world with herhusband…..Whoosh…..Immediately she had airline/cruise tickets in her hands.
The man wished for a female companion 30 yearsyounger…..Whoosh…..Immediately he turned ninety!!!
Gotta love that fairy! --------------------------------------------- Dear Lord, I pray for wisdom to understand my man, love to forgivehim, and patience for his moods. Because, Lord, if I pray for strength, I’ll beat him to death.
AMEN >>
Q: Why do little boys whine? A: They are practicing to be men. --------------------------------------------- Q: What do you call a handcuffed man? A: Trustworthy. --------------------------------------------- Q: What does it mean when a man is in your bed gasping forbreath and calling your name?
A: You did not hold the pillow down long enough. --------------------------------------------- Q: Why do men whistle when they are sitting on the toilet? A: It helps them remember which end they need to wipe. --------------------------------------------- Q: How do you keep your husband from reading your e-mail? A: Rename the mail folder "Instruction Manuals" ---------------------------------------------By Jack
February 16, 2007 01:21 PM | Link to this
Hi Lozen. I can only visit every now and then. I don’t want to get Big Brother mad. If I lose my job, the Mrs. and I will have to eat our children. :)
By Lover
February 16, 2007 02:05 PM | Link to this
Chilao—Did you catch “JFK Assassination:Beyond Conspiracy” last night on the History Channel?? Excellent program which piece-by-piece debunks all of the conspiracy theories surrounding the event. Right afterwards was an excellent show on the Nixon Presidency.
By Lover
February 16, 2007 02:07 PM | Link to this
Hi Lozen. I can only visit every now and then. I don’t want to get Big Brother mad. If I lose my job, the Mrs. and I will have to eat our children. :)
I’d hate to see you have to do that, Jack. After age 6 they begin to lose their tenderness and flavor. Kind of like a catfish.
By Lover
February 16, 2007 02:11 PM | Link to this
A special lady made of plastic, I suspect.
Well, if given the choice between a cold fish like you, Nikita, and plastic, I’ll have to go with the plastic.
By NetBanker
February 16, 2007 02:11 PM | Link to this
Hey kids. It’s been a very weird past few weeks with a corporate acquistion and the attending re-organization that occurs with them. Oh well…and this too shall pass.
I saw the topic and figured that it should be safe to wing through today since it IS Joke day, yes? The following isn’t really a joke, but it put a smile on my face so I’ll share.
To commemorate her 69th birthday on October 1, actress/vocalist, Julie Andrews made a special appearance at Manhattan’s Radio City Music Hall for the benefit of the AARP. One of the musical numbers she performed was “My Favorite Things” from the legendary movie, “Sound Of Music”. Here are the lyrics she used:
Maalox and nose drops and needles for knitting, Walkers and handrails and new dental fittings, Bundles of magazines tied up in string, These are a few of my favorite things.
Cadillacs and cataracts, and hearing aids and glasses, Polident and Fixodent and false teeth in glasses, Pacemakers, golf carts and porches with swings, These are a few of my favorite things.
When the pipes leak, When the bones creak, When the knees go bad, I simply remember my favorite things, And then I don’t feel so bad.
Hot tea and crumpets and corn pads for bunions, No spicy hot food or food cooked with onions, Bathrobes and heating pads and hot meals they bring, These are a few of my favorite things.
Back pains, confused brains, and no need for sinnin’, Thin bones and fractures and hair that is thinnin’, And we won’t mention our short shrunken frames, When we remember our favorite things.
When the joints ache, When the hips break, When the eyes grow dim, Then I remember the great life I’ve had, And then I don’t feel so bad.
Ms. Andrews received a standing ovation from the crowd that lasted over four minutes and repeated encores.) Please share Ms. Andrews’ clever wit and humor with others who would appreciate it.
By Lover
February 16, 2007 02:17 PM | Link to this
To tell you what a good lover I am, however, I’ve had many ladies tell me that I was that only man who could compete with their vibrators.
By HaHa
February 16, 2007 02:22 PM | Link to this
tell me that I was that only man who could compete with their vibrators.
It is probably a programmable voice-option on RealDolls
By Lover
February 16, 2007 02:29 PM | Link to this
How do you ladies say it—“A date with Mr. V” ?
By Chilao
February 16, 2007 02:29 PM | Link to this
Mommy mommy I am tired of runnin around in a circle….Mom says “Shut up Timmy or I will nail the other foot down too” ——Why did Helen Keller’s dog jump off a cliff?—You would kill yourself too if your name was “ARGHUDDDAEEEH”—How did Helen Keller burn her ear? She answered and iron….How did she burn the other ear? They called back….Why was her leg yellow? Her dog was blind too….What did Helen Keller do when she fell in a well? SHE SCREAMED HER HANDS OFF!
By Lover
February 16, 2007 02:38 PM | Link to this
Here’s an old one: How did Helen K meet her husband? On a blind date.
Why does Helen K masturbate with only one hand? She needs the other hand to have an orgasm.
By Chilao
February 16, 2007 02:45 PM | Link to this
another not mine at 2:29. means it must be Bruce Myers, aka dog, bruno, lover, liljohn, god, pos, K9, etc etc etc. it varies by the day, talk about schizoid.
https://dklbweb.dekalbga.org/TaxAssessor/realDisplay.asp?PID=18%20213%2004%20014
By Jack
February 16, 2007 02:47 PM | Link to this
She also burned her hands trying to read a waffle iron.
Bye Folks. Have a good weekend
By Lover
February 16, 2007 02:52 PM | Link to this
NetB—Special meeting in the “herb garden” after work today. Me, chuck, and kimberly will be there. chuck agreed to provide the “Christmas tree” again.
Bot, if I had only known earlier that chuck was talking about that kind of Christmas tree, I wouldn’t have whipped out Jeremiah 10 against him. ; > }
By Lover
February 16, 2007 02:54 PM | Link to this
nother not mine at 2:29. means it must be Bruce Myers, aka dog, bruno, lover, liljohn, god, pos, K9, etc etc etc. it varies by the day, talk about schizoid.
Back off, Chilao. I told you before that I posted under chuck’s name 5 months ago and that’s it (and Mara’s name once). Blame someone else, will you?
By Chilao
February 16, 2007 02:57 PM | Link to this
chuck’s name 5 months ago and that’s it (and Mara’s name once)
and who established the historical pattern there then?
By lozen
February 16, 2007 02:57 PM | Link to this
Equalamente Jack.
Chilao, schizoid just about sums it up.
Lover, Why don’t you slip into something more comfortable…like a coma.
By Lover
February 16, 2007 02:58 PM | Link to this
Say what you will about me, but I’ve never told someone to get off the blog or stoop to POS tactics like publishing people’s addresses. Some of you might need to take a deep look in the mirror, because what’s staring back will be total sh-t.
By Chilao
February 16, 2007 02:58 PM | Link to this
besides, you have absolutely NO CREDIBILITY in the * personal integrity* department.
By Chilao
February 16, 2007 03:04 PM | Link to this
You back off Lover with your weeded out ghetto self
By Lover
February 16, 2007 03:05 PM | Link to this
Well, Chilao, it appears that one of your Lib buddies doesn’t have much respect for you if someone is blogging under “your” name. I did it as a joke on chuck, but made sure it was obvious. Since then, “my” moniker has been copied many times. I guess it’s all my fault for starting it, but why don’t you try blaming the actual perpetrators instead?
By Chilao
February 16, 2007 03:05 PM | Link to this
stoop to POS tactics like publishing people’s addresses
exactly how many here view posting under other people’s names. which you have admitted to doing.
By Lover
February 16, 2007 03:08 PM | Link to this
That 3:04 doesn’t sound like you either, Chilao. Sorry if someone is sticking it to you, but it’s not me. You might look for clues by figuring out who “Mr. Rogers” is. I’ll log off for the rest of the month if it makes you happier, ok?
By Lover
February 16, 2007 03:16 PM | Link to this
exactly how many here view posting under other people’s names. which you have admitted to doing.
I’m getting a clue as to why you are twice-divorced, Chilao. My “crime” is blogging under chuck’s name about 6 months ago. So, because someone else did it to you today, you’re going to take out revenge on someone that you have no proof is the perpetrator. You’re a real stand-up guy, Chilao. Obviously, you have a high opinion of your own personal ethics, which proves once again that self-assessment is unreliable.
By NetBanker
February 16, 2007 04:22 PM | Link to this
Every sperm is sacred Chilao…wasn’t that a Monty Python song from something or other?
Why don’t you slip into something more comfortable…like a coma LOL! That’s a good one Lozen!
I’d love a meeting in the ‘herb garden’ but alas my Aunt and Uncle are in town to visit my cousin so we’re all gathering for a family dinner…with alcohol!
By lozen
February 16, 2007 04:23 PM | Link to this
Chilao, Unfortunately there is no vaccine against stupidity! And no way to test for it in fetuses! ;->
By lozen
February 16, 2007 04:40 PM | Link to this
Net, have a good ole family time and let’s meet in an herb garden some other time. Have a good weekend everybody.
By Chilao
February 16, 2007 04:54 PM | Link to this
I know, I know, if I remember correctly, it was all the OTHER people on the blog who made Dog behave the way he has.
It’s all our fault for our obvious misperceptions. SNORT
By Chilao
February 16, 2007 04:57 PM | Link to this
NetB - I had to forward yours on to some other old fogies I know. I went to a music venue last night, blues, and was coming home the opposite direction of my normal travels and I flat out missed my exit, next one was in 3 miles(luckily). Of course we are blaming that one on age, Wink wink. LOL
nice evening.
By mercedes 300 ce
February 16, 2007 09:34 PM | Link to this
mercedes 300 ce
By free ringtones
February 17, 2007 10:40 AM | Link to this
free ringtones http://phorumz.com/?mforum=freeringtones free ringtones
By vutqwa vqmsdohr
February 17, 2007 07:10 PM | Link to this
jvqn zfthc kctfuonj jowcgdyq tnilbf bcgxp eqsxlca
By Free ringtones
February 19, 2007 12:36 PM | Link to this
Largest Selection of FREE Ringtones Free ringtones [url=http://www.forumnow.com.br/vip/foruns.asp?forum=123050 ]Free ringtones[/url] http://www.forumnow.com.br/vip/foruns.asp?forum=123050
By buy carisoprodol online
February 20, 2007 10:02 PM | Link to this
Carisoprodol is a skeletal muscle relaxant whose active metabolite is meprobamate. Although several case reports have shown that carisoprodol has abuse potential, it continues to be widely prescribed. carisoprodol dia siguiente [url=http://carisoprod.ksiegagosci.info/ ]carisoprodol dia siguiente[/url] http://carisoprod.ksiegagosci.info/