• Welcome!
    |
    ||
    Logout|My Dashboard

A Republican war on women? - The Galveston County Daily News : Columns

October 21, 2014

‘Four Musketeers’ A Republican war on women?

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
  • 2 Don't Threaten or Abuse. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated. AND PLEASE TURN OFF CAPS LOCK.
  • 3 Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
  • 4 Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 5 Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 6 Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Welcome to the discussion.

78 comments:

    You must be a subscribed user to comment on this story.

  • sverige1 posted at 10:22 am on Tue, Aug 26, 2014.

    sverige1 Posts: 3574

    Response to .Rockstrongo posted at 8:55 pm on Wed, Aug 20, 2014:

    Well, rockstongo - Let's make it clear once again. You are not "killing babies". I am not "killing babies". Nor do I want the 1st choice to be "straight to killing". I don't make it an agenda to encourage as such. What I merely am doing is supplying a psychological and sociological rationale for the reasons young women choose to terminate their pregancies. In other words, I am simply reporting observable and emperical evidence.

    So, that being said: The bottom line is that individuals who are burdened with the need to exist (and that's all of us) must decide what to do to fulfill their obligation to survive. We all have to make a living (or find a way to amass income). All of us have to survive since we made it through the birth and upbringing stages of life. The unborn simply have not made it through those stages. Ipso facto, it is more of utility for the young woman to terminate what isn't already struggling to survive in the outside elements.

    As much as we often want to deny it, a fetus isn't a human being that costs money to feed, clothe, et cetera. A fetus doesn't have the responsibility to learn, grow, and navigate through the challenges of survival. The young woman carrying it does. Therefore, for those of us on earth having to make such daunting decisions have to ultimately end up with the choice among choices that causes less pain in the long run. BTW...of all these fetuses that don't make it to living/breathing earthlife - we do realize that their mercy-ending keeps them from perhaps later becoming criminals, becoming drains on society, becoming life-beings that have to struggle.

    They are called to Jesus with a lot less time of struggle and pain - in the long run. That is the observable, psychological, sociological explanation to the abortion choice.

     
  • kevjlang posted at 5:17 pm on Mon, Aug 25, 2014.

    kevjlang Posts: 3003

    Of course there are gaps to fill. And as long as we keep saying that there's too big of a gap, and don't do anything, the gap is going to get wider. People aren't going to learn how to act responsibly unless taught, and they won't teach the next generation unless they've learned it themselves. We have to start somewhere. A little bit at a time. Even if we just teach 5% more people to be more responsibility, we could have a significant impact on the issue. Will it cost money? Probably. Will there be savings on the back end? Perhaps so. Hopefully, saving people from the difficult decisions resulting from poor or uninformed decisions is worth some of that cost. It could very well keep some women from becoming welfare recipients, too.

     
  • gecroix posted at 7:38 pm on Sun, Aug 24, 2014.

    gecroix Posts: 3000

    AAAAAAAaaaaaaaagggggggghhhhhhhhhh........!!!!!!!!!!
    Picture hair flying in all directions right about here:

    It was a RHETORICAL question, for crissakes....
    Unless you are one of the codependent excusers, then wadded drawers are uncalled for.....

    JHC..!!!!
    I hope Sam's still has that Rogain going cheap....

    Actually, your latest response turns out by chance to be a PERFECT example of why it's so hard to teach people responsibility...because YOU, and about a zillion others, keep finding ways to say that unless this or unless that or this hand or that hand or something else is covered, then there are gaps that won't be filled.
    Guess what...there are ALWays slips between the cracks.
    You can't save everybody, so you save what you can.
    That starts by admitting that some won't be saved, and moving on from there.
    However, if you and the rest of the population want to give me personally absolute control over teaching responsibility and doling out punishment for lack of it or ignoring the lessons, just put up the funding, and get out of the way. I would recommend investing in earplugs, because there is going to be a lot of crying and cussing before we get back to a nation that does NOT think that 'it's somebody else's fault'' for everything....[beam][beam]

     
  • sverige1 posted at 6:47 pm on Sun, Aug 24, 2014.

    sverige1 Posts: 3574

    Response to pflinn posted at 5:18 pm on Sun, Aug 24, 2014:

    Nope, pfinn...I didn't mean to refer to visuals such as "bananas" or "coconuts". I am referring to more sociological studies that relate the studies to magazines and "clean" images from internet. Retrieved from the teacher, and of course approved by curriculum experts.

    We don't want to get things that would be considered "soft porn". But then again..that could be a fine line.

     
  • kevjlang posted at 6:14 pm on Sun, Aug 24, 2014.

    kevjlang Posts: 3003

    Evidently, you want to paint me with the brush of people making apologies for irresponsible people.

    "Personal Responsibility" is a pretty empty term if you're unwilling to check up on the people that should be responsible for teaching it. Just saying that the parents should teach it fails to account for what happens when the parents don't. You can say that the church teaches it, but not everyone goes to church. You can say that the schools teach it, but parents can opt their kids out. Where is the accountability BEFORE the kids become pregnant? Until you get that, you have people griping about personal responsibility while just leaving it to chance. Chance that the kid has good parents that teach them good judgement. Chance that the kid will learn it somewhere besides home. Chance that the kid will be socially awkward, and not inclined to those experiments. Chance that the kid will see the mistakes of his/her peers and figure it out for him/herself. Chance that the kid isn't seen as "sexually desirable".

     
  • gecroix posted at 5:21 pm on Sun, Aug 24, 2014.

    gecroix Posts: 3000

    "Why would anyone feel the need for responsibility who has codependent advocates excusing their lack of it ?'

    Yes, absolutely, I said that.
    Having read it, presumably verbatim, how did you extract from it :

    "Let's leave it up to chance then keep griping about "personal responsibility" when things don't turn out the way you want. If you refuse to take part in influencing the outcome, you don't have a whole lot of credibility when you don't get the outcome you wanted."

    On Earth, what I said means that it's hard to teach responsibility or get anyone to listen when so many people make excuses for the irresponsible people and let them slide.

    When you get a chance, let us know how your response is related to mine on your planet...
    [beam][beam][beam][beam]

     
  • pflinn posted at 5:18 pm on Sun, Aug 24, 2014.

    pflinn Posts: 252

    Response to sverige1 posted at 10:04 am on Sun. Aug 24, 2012

    "Vamp up the visuals, so to speak." (Did you really mean "Vamp up," or was that a play on words for "Ramp up?")

    Either way, that is not a good idea with high school kids. The "visuals" in the textbook are State of Texas approved. Other non-state-approved "visuals" would probably get a teacher in trouble. Besides, these kids have already seen too many "visuals" on the internet, and they have very vivid imaginations.

    Some years ago a teacher got in big trouble for using a banana and a condom as "visuals." You cannot do that with other people's children. You must be very careful in what you say and do when you answer questions and discuss this topic with students.

     
  • kevjlang posted at 2:20 pm on Sun, Aug 24, 2014.

    kevjlang Posts: 3003

    Did you not write:

    Why would anyone feel the need for responsibility who has codependent advocates excusing their lack of it ?

    Don't think I ever excused anyone's lack of personal responsibility. However, I have seen plenty a young child take a toy from another child. Some kids require a few scolding sessions before they learn the personal responsibility required to quit taking toys from other kids.

    Yet, you're quick to criticize my remarks that we need to teach people better about managing their reproduction BEFORE being "blessed" with life they're not responsible enough to care for.

    For robbers, our justice system, during the whole process, considers things like "remorse", "restitution", etc. However, what I keep hearing is that if you have sex with the wrong boy at the wrong time, that's just too darned bad. Full price.

    Let's do better at teaching how NOT to get pregnant when you don't want to or are unprepared for it. Then, we don't have to try to find or verify society's answers to the following, non-exhaustive, list of questions:

    Abortion?
    Adoption?
    Keep the baby?
    Will someone adopt the baby?
    Will the person adopting the baby be any better that I could be?
    Will I want to see the child when it grows up?
    Will the child want to see me when it grows up?
    Will the child turn out OK?
    Will I turn out OK?

    Perhaps you DID teach your children about personal responsibility in all aspects of their lives. Perhaps most parents do. However, with our crime rate and unexpected/unwanted pregnancy rate, it's obvious that plenty of parents don't. We need to do something to close that gap. Give us one less thing to debate/argue about. Personal Responsibility is no accident.

     
  • sverige1 posted at 10:04 am on Sun, Aug 24, 2014.

    sverige1 Posts: 3574

    Response to carlosrponce posted at 7:54 am on Sun, Aug 24, 2014:

    Seems like the health and sex ed teachers need to vamp up the visuals, so to speak. What I find interesting are those studies that survey 100 people to rate "attractiveness" - and they vary the control group with different styles of dress, make-up, hairstyles. This can relate to "sex", its characteristics and so forth.

    If they could incorporate some fashion, psychology, and some sociology, it might make it more interesting.

     
  • carlosrponce posted at 7:54 am on Sun, Aug 24, 2014.

    carlosrponce Posts: 2515

    Think of the classes you have taught, pflinn. You would think that when the health teachers/coaches discuss sex he or she would have undivided attention with minds eager to grasp every bit of information. But it is the same as if it were an English or math course, sometimes even worse. I have heard high school students in a post sex talk discus among themselves that the teacher/nurse/coach did not know what she was talking about or how "boring" it was. It depends on the quality of instruction, the interest of the student, the time of day, etc. (same as ANY subject). And as you point out, some health teachers are reluctant to teach the subject. I agree that "Parents should handle "the talks" when the child starts asking questions."

     
  • sverige1 posted at 6:01 pm on Sat, Aug 23, 2014.

    sverige1 Posts: 3574

    Response to gecroix posted at 5:28 pm on Sat, Aug 23, 2014:

    An important concept that appears to escape you is the great liklihood that if a young woman was coerced to bring baby to term, then keep her baby - the baby will very likely spend an entire childhood (if he/makes it that long) of strife and neglect.

    The proponents of abortion choice realize that no good comes from a source of motherhood that very little cultivates the upbringing of the child. Already, with the children that are existing now we have mothers (and fathers) who: shake baby until extreme injury/death, leave baby unattended in 110-plus car interiors, place an inattentive caring whereas baby can walk into a lake or pool and drown, et cetera et cetera.

    Coming to the realization that sparing many children from a potentially unfit parent is indeed the best in the long-run.

     
  • gecroix posted at 5:28 pm on Sat, Aug 23, 2014.

    gecroix Posts: 3000

    Nurse, I got the inconvenience from YOU, as you are the one who said abortion may be chosen so as to not interfeer with an education, job, or even a social life.
    I simply chose inconvenience as another way of saying the same thing.
    I don't expect tyou to chew yourself out about it..... [beam]

    Some teachers, which is why I SAID 'some', let their politics get in the way of their job, which is teaching....

    The other stuff I've already posited or said, repeatedly, straight up...no ifs, and, buts, and no reason for assumptions or guesses or even a Magic 8 Ball....
    as Popeye said, 'I yam what I yam'...... [wink]

    Hopefully, people won't decide that age should not be a consideration for offing anybody getting in the way of us continuing after our PERSONAL indiscretions or irresponsible acts, or even just bad luck... a 4 year old or Granny won't flush down the toilet very easy.

    Bye. Back to the lease for more fun in the sun...

     
  • carlosrponce posted at 2:20 pm on Sat, Aug 23, 2014.

    carlosrponce Posts: 2515

    "Planned Parenthood does not use tax money for abortions". It's a bookkeeping thing. Tax dollars pay for the facilities, the medical equipment, the receptionists, the doctors, the consultation, everything but the actual abortion.

     
  • NurseJayne posted at 1:12 pm on Sat, Aug 23, 2014.

    NurseJayne Posts: 343

    To call nine months of pregnancy an 'inconvenience' shows that you still disregard women as incubators.

    Planned Parenthood does not use tax money for abortions, period. Unless you know how to access federal programs, you can't use them. It's proven, time and time again, that easy access to information and birth control drops abortion rates. If you are against abortion, you should encourage programs that increase education, not decry them by claiming teachers are 'irresponsible'.

    Requiring parental consent for classes is no better than expecting parents to address the issue themselves; the same ones who are uncomfortable teaching this type of responsibility at home are the same parents who are convinced their children are abstaining..... at least until they come home pregnant, that is.

    I'm not sure what 'indoctrination' takes place in sex ed clinics, but if it's the idea that women can control reproduction and therefore get an education and a firm hold on adult life before mothering, than I'm all for it.

     
  • gecroix posted at 11:55 am on Sat, Aug 23, 2014.

    gecroix Posts: 3000

    "Or maybe it's because those who are so concerned about 'life' don't seem to care about the lives of women, just unborn babies.":
    I care about the lives of women.
    But, of course, nobody is KILLING those women, so the issue is really not about their lives, but the inconvenience that some decide they don't want.

    Planned Parenthood is also a front for taxpayer funded abortion.
    There are a lot more WalMarts than Planned Parenthoods, and there are federal programs that will MAIL your often free contraceptives to you, so contraception is hardly hampered by no Planned Parenthood centers, although, as some exposes have shown, the 'advice' given by them on how to 'beat the system' or engage in questionable practices may be hampered somewhat...
    I favor teaching responsibility - every parent should do so. I don't see why it's a schools business to teach my child responsibility, or even desireable, as so many in academia are what I personally consider irresponsible, themselves..
    I do think it's a good idea to offer sex education classes in school, though, WITH the student's parents permission to attend, and if the materials taught are designed to inform, not indoctrinate. For some reason, so many parents shirk this basic part of teaching your child how to live life responsibly - and, hopefully, by good example...

    It's a really good thing that all of us alive had people who cared about those unborn babies...

     
  • pflinn posted at 11:29 am on Sat, Aug 23, 2014.

    pflinn Posts: 252

    I am not sure what they teach in public middle schools, but in public high schools health teachers/coaches teach the basics about sex and the fact that birth control is out there. If this is the first time the child has heard about "responsibility" that is a shame. Often, information presented in high school is too late. Some middle school girls get pregnant during the school year.

    Parents should handle "the talks" when the child starts asking questions. Communication between parent and child is important in that regard because students will talk about it among themselves. Some may even ask a teacher at school in order to avoid asking their parent(s) questions.

    The joke among substitute teachers was that a health teacher might leave THOSE chapters in the book for a sub to handle with classes. This, to me, is a teacher shirking responsibility!

     
  • sverige1 posted at 8:35 am on Sat, Aug 23, 2014.

    sverige1 Posts: 3574

    OMG, carlosrponce -
    Very early-aged children know more than we think. For example, sex identity is formed well before age 5. That's why it's very easy to detect when a boy or a girl demonstrates non-traditional sex-identity characteristics, such as a girl wanting to play Tonka trucks or a boy preferring pink colors and easy-bake ovens.

    Also, at a very young age, children are curious about same-sex moms and dads. They know very soon that the mom/mom and dad/dad are people just like everyone else. They love, have feelings of ups and downs just like anyone else. That's why it's so important to teach children that sex (characteristics of identity and the acts of) is natural and should be addressed honestly and openly. Sex education can and should start from age 2 1/2 or 3 and thereafter.

     
  • carlosrponce posted at 8:03 am on Sat, Aug 23, 2014.

    carlosrponce Posts: 2515

    Nurse Jayne, Schools have their hands full trying to teach the basics. How about recommending a video or creating one of your own for the parents of Galveston County to show their kids what they need to know about sex. The problem with sex education in schools is that not all kids are ready for the "sex talk" at the same age. Pass out the condoms and some boys fill them with water and throw them at each other, other boys will stick them in their wallet and let them deteriorate while others will tell you "that's not my brand".

     
  • NurseJayne posted at 7:19 am on Sat, Aug 23, 2014.

    NurseJayne Posts: 343

    Perhaps the suggestion is that those who decry abortion and teen pregnancy fail to see that easier access to contraception drops both of those numbers dramatically..... and yet work to close Planned Parenthood clinics throughout the state.

    Perhaps it is the idea that teaching responsibility and birth control also drops teen pregnancy and abortion rates.... and yet still refuse to allow that teaching to happen in Texas schools.

    Or maybe it's because those who are so concerned about 'life' don't seem to care about the lives of women, just unborn babies.

     
  • gecroix posted at 6:02 pm on Fri, Aug 22, 2014.

    gecroix Posts: 3000

    "Let's leave it up to chance then keep griping about "personal responsibility" when things don't turn out the way you want. If you refuse to take part in influencing the outcome, you don't have a whole lot of credibility when you don't get the outcome you wanted."
    ??????
    You didn't get that from me.
    What was it, then, the voices inside your head?
    [wink]

     
  • kevjlang posted at 12:39 pm on Fri, Aug 22, 2014.

    kevjlang Posts: 3003

    OK. Sure. Let's leave it up to chance then keep griping about "personal responsibility" when things don't turn out the way you want. If you refuse to take part in influencing the outcome, you don't have a whole lot of credibility when you don't get the outcome you wanted.

    Thank God those refineries in Texas City aren't operated by chance. Lord knows the catastrophes that would arise if you didn't teach people what responsible actions in the facility are.

    On second thought, why don't we just give everyone that's 12 or 13 years old a set of car keys to a Porche 911. Whatever happens after that, well, that's personal responsibility. You'd probably see the abortion rate go down, too.

     
  • gecroix posted at 9:51 am on Fri, Aug 22, 2014.

    gecroix Posts: 3000

    It was too hot at the lease yesterday for me to care whether anybody was aiming at me - being shot would have been a release from the misery...[wink] That bobcat advocate missed a chance...[beam]

    Gee, nobody ever told little Jeff not to rob banks, so it's OK for big Jeff to rob banks, and take away from others, for his personal convenience, because he wasn't told.
    Gee, nobody ever told little Sandra that it's wrong to shop lift, so it's OK for big Sandra to take away from others, for her personal convenience, because she wasn't told.
    How much more taking away can there be, than taking away LIFE, and for personal convenience....
    All the hyperbolic distractions about returning to 1850's and sidetracks into dying from chuldbirth (can you find ONE example when I've said the health of the mother is not a good reason, the actual health, not the psyco babble type....no...you can't...) , etc., do not change the actual issue, the ONLY issue, KILLING just because you find it convenient to do so. You contradict your own message (and your 'cheering section'...
    [wink]), by saying every able body was needed, then talking about dying from botched abortions - what do you think the woman was doing - trying to get that baby out a little early to get to work in the corn fields?!
    In 'the old days', 'back when', they didn't HAVE widely available, even FREE contraception...did they.
    But, one might say, birth controil is not 100% effective. True. it's also not a REQUIREMENT that sex have no risk, before or after.
    Perhaps the same folks should ask Kermit Gossnell if abortion is 100% 'effective'...he's got plenty of idle time in prison to respond to them...after killing LIVE, born, babies that survived attempts to abort them.

    'Demand personal responsibility'...
    Why would anyone feel the need for responsibility who has codependent advocates excusing their lack of it ?
    Catch 22....you can't be for it, and against it....

    YOU personally do NOT KNOW who all has 'made an effort' , do you.
    I can name two people right off the bat who made an effort:
    YOUR Mother, and mine.
    We wouldn't be posting, or doing anything else except rotting in a landfill or sewer, otherwise.....

     
  • NurseJayne posted at 8:43 am on Fri, Aug 22, 2014.

    NurseJayne Posts: 343

    Ohmygosh! I am SO sorry! Now I owe you BOTH a drink! (I can't rescind a drink offer as a case of mistaken identity....)[wink]

     
  • truthserum posted at 11:12 pm on Thu, Aug 21, 2014.

    truthserum Posts: 498

    However, my pre-school teacher did tell that everything that was in a Dr. Suess book.[smile]

    I do not condone abortion but if a man could conceive children this would be a completely different argument.

     
  • truthserum posted at 11:04 pm on Thu, Aug 21, 2014.

    truthserum Posts: 498

    The only war on Reublican Women is the war on these ladies prairie skirt fashions.

     
  • carlosrponce posted at 7:55 pm on Thu, Aug 21, 2014.

    carlosrponce Posts: 2515

    Planet sverige -no elderly, no kids from rural areas, nor those living in trailers, only perfect children without physical or mental disabilities. If conceived that way ABORT and "Return to Sender". There was a Star Trek Episode about people like you. They put them in a space ship "Botany Bay" and sent them into deep space. Eugenicists were considered "bad people." The Nazis of 20th Century Germany practiced eugenics called "Ubermenschen". Some humans were targeted who were identified as "life unworthy of life" including but not limited to the criminal, degenerate, dissident, feeble-minded, homosexual, idle, insane, and the weak, Jews, Gypsies, non-Aryans for elimination from the chain of heredity. So sverige includes "the "upper" stock of the professional UTMB crowd, or trailer kids from rural parts of the county, elderly folks who need an end to their suffering in hospice...et cetera, et cetera." Progressive, sverige? Even the founder of Planned Parenthood Margaret Sanger believed in Eugenics. Margaret Sanger spoke of sterilizing those she designated as "unfit".

     
  • sverige1 posted at 5:25 pm on Thu, Aug 21, 2014.

    sverige1 Posts: 3574

    Rogstrogo -
    I have no earthly idea where you concocted the notion that I am an aficionado to the "killing of black and Hispanic kids". Au contraire - I am a proponent of the goal to end strife and suffering.

    Sometimes it's best to wish that hopefully one's demise is a sign that Jesus is calling him/her. I would wish that on any race of a child or adult. That includes the "upper" stock of the professional UTMB crowd, or trailer kids from rural parts of the county, elderly folks who need an end to their suffering in hospice...et cetera, et cetera. I think you're just a big gobsmacked that I try to write in terms of reality, and not the unrealistic idea that every life being is going to be "saved" and live to a ripe age of 100.

     
  • kevjlang posted at 5:24 pm on Thu, Aug 21, 2014.

    kevjlang Posts: 3003

    Regarding the last statement, gecroix, this isn't directed at you, as you apparently did something right. However, it is intended toward people that want to spout out about it being personal responsibility without making an effort to ensure people are armed with the necessary information to avoid the irresponsible actions.

     
  • sverige1 posted at 5:15 pm on Thu, Aug 21, 2014.

    sverige1 Posts: 3574

    What am I, chopped liver? LMAO [beam]

     
  • NurseJayne posted at 4:58 pm on Thu, Aug 21, 2014.

    NurseJayne Posts: 343

    Kevin, you said it more eloquently than I ever could.

    If I ever have the pleasure of meeting you, I'm buying you a drink.[beam]

     
  • kevjlang posted at 4:42 pm on Thu, Aug 21, 2014.

    kevjlang Posts: 3003

    No, back in the old days, there were abortions. It's just that no one talked about them, and many women paid dearly for them--many with their lives and others with their longer-term fertility. Also, back when we were a farming and manufacturing based society, every able body was going to be needed pretty soon. Also, most women only had responsibilities to their households.

    I presume you aren't longing for the role of women to go back to the 1850's model are you? If so, is it just women that should go back, or would you long for the lifestyle of those days, too? I don't think they had air conditioning, pickup trucks, or Diet Coke back then. Not many refineries, either. Oh, well, at least most women popped out whatever babies they happened to be blessed with, at least until the woman or the baby died in the process.

    Do I like the idea that babies are being aborted? Nope. Never said I did, and, in fact, I've stated that I don't in other threads. However, if that's the desire, a more active role that saying that it's murder, irresponsibility, and other such things is not the way we're going to solve it. If you're looking for personal responsibility, demand it, and make sure you provide the upbringing necessary to ensure the capability.

     
  • mytoby3113 posted at 9:17 am on Thu, Aug 21, 2014.

    mytoby3113 Posts: 422

    I am so sick and TIRED of men decideing what women should with their.bodies
    Men do not have bear shame , the pains etc.
    I am not for abortion , but I do not think men should have the last say in this matter..
    Don't say you do not want your TAX dollars used for that. Your TAX dollars pay all the spending that goes to the state and it is nothing you can say or do about. it.

    WE AL HAVE MADE MISTAKES [sad]

     
  • sverige1 posted at 8:17 am on Thu, Aug 21, 2014.

    sverige1 Posts: 3574

    Response to Rockstrongo posted at 8:55 pm on Wed, Aug 20, 2014:

    Well, I don't mind playing "Yahoo answers" for a moment. You ask "Why don't young women give up their unwanted babies for adoption?" Some do, but the others who choose abortion do so because: 1. physically, having the baby to term could cause great risk to young mother's body - according to doctor, uterus and related inner beings might be compromised - so advisement is to terminate child. Especially if young mother is not fully developed woman herself. 2. "attachment conflict" - if young mother who initially decides to give up baby indeed brings baby to term, she may be wrougjht with emotional attachment and want to keep baby. So, abortion is a more "final" solution. 3. social stigma of bringing fetus to term...young mother may psychologically become in shambles throughout the process. 4. cost - it is not cheap to have a baby during the full-term pregnancy. And thereafter is the cost of raising and caring for child.

    We may then say, "Oh, well, those are bad reasons." Well, again - rockgstorngo - these aren't decisions that men have to be burdened to make. I'm sure there's many women who would be appalled that men writing on an opinion forum are telling women what they should do in these trying times of theirs. Interesting that you nor I ever have to face this type of situation.

     
  • Rockstrongo posted at 8:55 pm on Wed, Aug 20, 2014.

    Rockstrongo Posts: 131

    You just don't get it do you? A momentary lapse in judgement should not result in the baby getting murdered. Why are you so he'll bent on killing the baby? Why not adoption if the baby-makers can't rise the baby? Why do you go straight to killing?

     
  • gecroix posted at 6:35 pm on Wed, Aug 20, 2014.

    gecroix Posts: 3000

    It's amazing that mankind has survived for eons without, to date, needing to be 'instructed' in the basic working of, well, basic parts...and the likely outcome of working them.
    I figure it's just another manifestation of an ever increasing society of dependency and reassignment of blame....
    The old 'Nobody TOLD me that you can't lose weight if you eat the Atkins bar, then a seven course meal on top of it' dodge, or 'I'm suing because nobody told me I might cut myself on a knife blade'...[whistling]
    YCFI

     
  • kevjlang posted at 6:02 pm on Wed, Aug 20, 2014.

    kevjlang Posts: 3003

    I have no qualms about pushing the participants into being knowledgeable and fully understanding of, and responsible for their actions. BOTH. I also have no qualms about including the parents of such, too, if the two active participants were not educated on such matters before learning the hard way.

    At least our society makes an effort to make sure that people have some understanding of what proper behavior in banks and cars is. However, when it comes to creating human life, we just leave it to chance. Biology wouldn't know if you have a license to "drive" even if society requested, or even demanded one. All biology knows is that there's some "driving" going on, and biology does what biology does.

    I would guess that most of the people getting abortions--at least those where the sex was forced or coerced upon them--involve at least one, if not two (or perhaps more than that) don't know how things really work, and are either figuring things out on their own, or are being taught by someone with less than honorable intentions.

    Most people wouldn't give a gun to someone without giving them some training. However, people get genitals whether they're trained or not.

     
  • sverige1 posted at 5:58 pm on Wed, Aug 20, 2014.

    sverige1 Posts: 3574

    Well, rotstrongo -

    I never said that it is "better to kill a baby than to ever practice self-control". Never ever. You might be surprised, but I was raised very old-fashioned. My mom put me aside and told me not to let a girl talk me into "showing love" and getting her in trouble. Overprotective mom and very Catholic and religious upbringing. So, never would I think it's better for a girl/woman to have to take that last drastic step, a step that brings the girl/woman many more issues to have to deal with after the abortion.

    The jist of what my stance is references that term called "reality". It is reality that boys/men will get girl/woman "in trouble". Someone (and it's usually the girl/woman) has to figure out what to do. If she isn't up to the job of being a fit mother, then - yes - I think her choice to terminate the pregnancy is a better choice in the long run.

    Now, why don't you answer to NurseJayne's reference point. What would YOU do if you impregnated a girl/woman, you're the guy with little to no job nor means of financing a child, and you didn't want to wear a condom. And OOOPS!! You and the girl/woman at the moment of "passion" weren't thinking of all this and she indeed got knocked up. What would you do? Be honest...you just might start talking the girl/woman into aborting that child.

    Some of you folks who try to lambast the individuals who choose to terminate their pregnancy need to look at it in the eyes of a social worker....these are tough choices to make. It's not Andy Griffith where a shotgun wedding can be quickly done to prevent "shame"....and Aunt Judy isn't going to Babies R Us bridal registry website to contribute to the giving of gifts to the "happy" couple. These are real people with real 2014 problems.

     
  • gecroix posted at 3:35 pm on Wed, Aug 20, 2014.

    gecroix Posts: 3000

    So, how about if the guy decides that the woman should have an abortion, but she doesn't want one....
    From any direction, we're not TALKING about ending the life of the sperm donor or the egg generator...it's a third party death...the INNOCENT one...

    Would you pounce on the morality of killing a 4 year old who was 'in the way'?
    How about a 2 year old?
    OK, then....we've decided that's wrong, so how is killing for convenience so easily 'justified' at any stage of human life...

    If you don't want to maybe get broadsided, don't run stop signs.
    If you don't want to maybe go to prison, don't rob banks.
    If you don't know if your 3 minutes (3 minutes? THAT should be a criminal offense...[beam][beam]) will likely result in pregnancy, then don't play.

    This is starting to sound like the fatsos who sued McDonalds after eating themselves into blimps...it wasn't THEIR fault entirely they got fat....
    Well, who had the lard hanging off them? Mickey D's?
    It just ain't 'fair'?
    Welcome to the real world, not the phony 'progressive' one...

     
  • kevjlang posted at 1:48 pm on Wed, Aug 20, 2014.

    kevjlang Posts: 3003

    You're right. Biology is what it is. Last time I took it, it still took both a sperm and an egg for fertilization, and it took a man to provide the sperm and a woman to provide the egg. So, the personal responsibility belongs to TWO people, not just one. Since "progressives" and "conservatives" seem to have no problem dismissing one of those two from the conversation, then how much clout and credibility can we have in demanding 200% of personal responsibility from 1 person. Biology says that she's the only one that can can carry the baby to term. Biology doesn't say that she has to be the only person trying to decide whether to raise the baby herself (probably to the disdain of conservatives that will fault her for accepting government assistance) or finding someone else to take the baby.

    He only has to decide whether to choose 3 minutes of pleasure. She has to decide everything else in a world of zillions ready to pounce on the legality and morality of everything else she does.

    Personal Responsibility? Seems to me that in many of these situations, there's only one that's even trying in that regard.

     
  • carlosrponce posted at 1:43 pm on Wed, Aug 20, 2014.

    carlosrponce Posts: 2515

    God created man. Out of man he created woman. After that he created no one. In his infinite Wisdom He gave the ability to create other humans to women. God chose wisely, for women have the ability not only to carry the baby to term but also to nurture and care for that child once born. Thank God for women!

     
  • gecroix posted at 1:20 pm on Wed, Aug 20, 2014.

    gecroix Posts: 3000

    Kevjlang, you might as well bemoan the fact that some get to stand up while others have to sit down to P.
    Biology is what it is.
    Morality is what we make it. Perhaps 'progressives' should do a little more focusing on PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY for ALL people, including the type trash that doesn't live up to their obligations, instead of making a life's work out of excusing everything as 'someone else's' fault.
    If we ever catch that Someone Else guy, he's got a LOT of 'splainin' to do.....

     
  • kevjlang posted at 1:07 pm on Wed, Aug 20, 2014.

    kevjlang Posts: 3003

    I, personally, don't like the "War on Women" term. How that got into our political lexicon, I'll never know nor care to know.

    I'm just saying that if two people create the situation, and people refuse to hold one of the two accountable for his role, then why are we so willing to dump all of the guilt on the one left with the responsibility of figuring out the path forward. Regardless of how it turns out, in a majority of the cases, one person lives with the outcome for the rest of her life, and the other person responsible carries on as though nothing happened. Why is it that possession of the womb means that 50% of the contribution means 100% of the responsibility? She's the murderer. He? He's not even in the discussion. She's the one that made the immoral "choice". He? Evidently, he didn't have anything to do with it.

     
  • gecroix posted at 12:24 pm on Wed, Aug 20, 2014.

    gecroix Posts: 3000

    So, rather than divert, ya'll should make up your minds.
    Is it to be a 'woman's right to choose', which EXCLUDES any consideration of the other half of the pregnancy tango, or shared responsibility?
    How about if BOTH want the human life exterminated? Is that better...for the dead one?
    All ya'll are doing is parsing, and attempting to justify KILLING a HUMAN LIFE just because of a bad decision, a 'mistake', one or both participants too lazy or dumb to use contraception, or just because_______ (fill in the blank with any convenient excuse).
    A KITTEN gets more consideration than a human baby these days - you burn a kitten to death or rip it apart and throw it in the trash, and if caught you will be prosecuted.
    Do that to a human baby, and you'll be saluted by 'progressives'...

    What we have is a bogus 'war on women' while ACTUALLY conducting a 'war on life'...
    And MY SIDE of the argument is the one that's being 'extreme' and 'uncaring'????
    That's just a small step, an 'evolved' public mindset, from deciding that anyone at ANY age who is now 'inconvenient' can be legally killed.

     
  • kevjlang posted at 10:58 am on Wed, Aug 20, 2014.

    kevjlang Posts: 3003

    So, because God decided to give women a uterus, that means that men are done, well, once they're "done", and everything that follows after is the woman's responsibility to handle in the most socially responsible way? If that's the case, then, I would say that if men aren't to be held responsible for what happens next, then men are absolving themselves of whatever happens next. If that's the case, then I don't think our opinion on whether abortion is a sin means a hill of beans, since we don't think that we've done anything wrong by planting seeds that we have no intention of tending.

     
  • gecroix posted at 9:42 am on Wed, Aug 20, 2014.

    gecroix Posts: 3000

    You'll have to file a grievance against God.
    He's the one who decided where to put the womb...

    Aside from that, I'll say again, if the woman consents to sex, sheathed, or pilled, or bare of protection, it's consensual. If she rejects, and is forced, it's a crime...report it.
    'Falling for a line' should not be the reason for a death sentence for a life...
    Nor is it a reason, imho, to reduce the process of giving human life to the level of hatching chicken eggs.

     
  • NurseJayne posted at 9:12 am on Wed, Aug 20, 2014.

    NurseJayne Posts: 343

    "I don't want to wear one," is a pretty typical male response. If I reject him as a suitor and the next girl falls for his excuses, it is still her fault that she is pregnant and alone?

    At what point (other than declaring that women should be incubators) do men share in the responsibility? Men are pitchers and women are catchers but the guy on the mound never gets hit.

    If you want to defend an unborn baby, make sure it's the one YOU are gestating and not someone else's.

     
  • Rockstrongo posted at 7:59 am on Wed, Aug 20, 2014.

    Rockstrongo Posts: 131

    NurseJayne, the term "socially enlightened" came from your fellow traveler, Sverige. Not from me.

    It sounds to me like you may be fooling around with the wrong men. I just hope you didn't fall for their excuses. Their words sounds like people that don't respect women. Maybe that's the reason for your frustration?

     
  • carlosrponce posted at 7:17 pm on Tue, Aug 19, 2014.

    carlosrponce Posts: 2515

    Cuddling is fine by me. My standard for sex requires a marriage ceremony first. You may call me old-fashioned, or any other names buts that's me. I fail to see your animosity toward Rockstrongo since he advocates defending the unborn and personal responsibility.

     
  • NurseJayne posted at 6:46 pm on Tue, Aug 19, 2014.

    NurseJayne Posts: 343

    Easy to call it a 'gift' when it's not yours to carry.

    "Once that egg is fertilized, it's no longer about making decisions just for self."

    I see.

    So how many decisions will you take from me for the sake of another?

    If I drink or smoke, I'm sure you feel a lifestyle change is in order. And if my diet is poor, perhaps you should dictate what I eat. Since there is no way of telling that a woman is in charge of another life early on, should we call for all women to report monthly, so we can start the process right away?

     
  • NurseJayne posted at 6:39 pm on Tue, Aug 19, 2014.

    NurseJayne Posts: 343

    Whoo-eee, are you a smooth talker, Rockstrongo!

    I have met some smooth talking men who don't want to wear a condom, but they usually offer a different excuse.

    "I don't like the way they feel."

    "I don't have one and don't feel like getting up to go to the store."

    I would even be impressed by, "Since we don't have protection, let's just cuddle."

    Not once has one offered, "I am socially enlightened. I want to make a baby so we can both enjoy ripping it from your body so you're not inconvenienced."

    What an opening line! I guess that explains some of your frustration........

     
  • Rockstrongo posted at 6:05 pm on Tue, Aug 19, 2014.

    Rockstrongo Posts: 131

    So murdering babies is "socially enlightened"??!!! You are saying that it is more respectful of women to murder babies than to practice safe sex??!! It's more socially enlightened to kill a baby than to give birth and put it up for adoption? If you don't want kids, there is a sure fire way not to have them; don't have sex. But to the "socially enlightened" like yourself, it's better to kill a baby than to practice a little self control, or at the very least use protection.

    How is defending unborn babies, and standing for personal responsibility "against women"?

     
  • sverige1 posted at 12:12 pm on Tue, Aug 19, 2014.

    sverige1 Posts: 3574

    Response to Rockstrongo posted at 6:50 am on Tue, Aug 19, 2014:

    Well, Paris, Bill, and George may very well think their lives are meaningless. Robin Williams apparently did. As the saying goes, life's a "crap game". There are many of us here who wouldn't mind a minute if we suddenly "went to Jesus". I hope, for some in misery, it's sooner or later.

    Now, more on subject...it's not your nor my decision in regard to an individual potential mother making the choice to keep her child to term. So, I agree with you . I am not God, and neither are you. What I don't agree with you is the republican view on women. There are many in that camp who still adhere to the archaic adage that young women only need an "aspirin between their legs". There's plenty of republican/teaparty leaders that still say/believe that. Much less so of Democrats. Democrats are simply more socially enlightened.

     
  • gecroix posted at 10:16 am on Tue, Aug 19, 2014.

    gecroix Posts: 3000

    No healthy, mentally competent, or non-crime victim HAS to, imho. It is, quite literally, a 'choice'.

    Dismissive? No.
    The most precious gift of all, that without which ALL other gifts are meaningless, life, just strikes me as something worth working for.
    It was for the parents of the person who now figures it isn't....

    Once that egg is fertilized, it's no longer about making decisions just for self.

    Anyway, we go our separate ways.
    Again....[smile]

     
  • NurseJayne posted at 8:09 am on Tue, Aug 19, 2014.

    NurseJayne Posts: 343

    Thanks for the nod to the profession, George. I worked twenty years and hope to go back. I often went home mentally and physically exhausted, but never bored.

    You said, "I can think of none of those things, though, that allow us to kill the result if we decide that WE just WANT want to."

    No one wants to have an abortion.

    "I will never agree, though, that being inconvenienced is one of them."

    It's pretty dismissive to call nine months of pregnancy and a subsequent child to raise an 'inconvenience'.

    Inconvenient is a flat tire when you need to go to work. Nine months of gestation is not. If you can assume that women have the judgment needed to raise a child, give her the benefit of making the decisions for herself, not in the court of public opinion or the legal courts.

     
  • Rockstrongo posted at 6:50 am on Tue, Aug 19, 2014.

    Rockstrongo Posts: 131

    Sverige, you realize that someone like Bill Gates, George Clooney or even Paris Hilton, could argue that YOUR life is full of misery and strife. Should they be able to "abort" you to save you from "an imperfect earth environment".

    Who decided that you get to play God??!!

    Your ease at killing people that may have it worse than you is scary beyond belief!!!

     
  • Rockstrongo posted at 6:41 am on Tue, Aug 19, 2014.

    Rockstrongo Posts: 131

    You are quite the fan of killing black and Hispanic kids, arent you!! You have unwittingly just shown the true face of the pro abortion crowd. You are one disgusting hate monger!!!

     
  • kevjlang posted at 10:07 pm on Mon, Aug 18, 2014.

    kevjlang Posts: 3003

    What our society continually fails to come to grips with is the significant number of people that don't have birth control available, wouldn't know what to do with it if it were, and are uninformed about how reproduction works, and naive enough to let someone equally uninformed teach them about it.

    Lots of people with parents that won't teach them what they need to know not allowing the schools to teach it to them, and then everyone acts surprised when they learn behind the gym what they should have learned in the breakfast room or living room. What should happen in those cases is for the negligent parents to carry and raise that child, however, we aren't going to see that happen.

    It's one thing to demand one be responsible for things he/she is expected to know about. How strict of a lesson do we think we need to teach someone when they learn accidentally what someone else should have taught intentionally?

     
  • gecroix posted at 5:51 pm on Mon, Aug 18, 2014.

    gecroix Posts: 3000

    Or, Nurse, perhaps I simply disagree with the way you characterize the differences.
    I have a very good reference source of my own on speed dial...a 'non-choice' [wink]

    There is, what, a 5% or so chance that BC pills won't work on average.
    So, then, is it fair to let the other 95% piggyback on the 'unintended' dodge?
    Is there anyone alive with an IQ over, oh, 30 that doesn't know that birth control is not 100% effective?
    Maybe...but we're not discusssing mental incompetency here, at this time.
    Life gives us all kinds of regrets when we make bad choices or things don't turn out like the instructions said they would, and we certainly get hammered time to time when we go in (no pun...) to an activity knowing there's a risk of things turning south.
    I can think of none of those things, though, that allow us to kill the result if we decide that WE just WANT want to.
    Pity the poor car salesman, if it were carried to extremes, if we have buyers remorse about that Mini Cooper we bought to haul a 36 foot trailer with...

    Look, I think Roe v Wade really sucks, and has resulted in infanticide on a scale large enough to populate the entire state of California, with a few smaller states to spare, BUT, it's the law, and the way to fight it is through legal channels.
    I hold no personal animus against you or anyone in particular for feeling otherwise.
    I know there are multiple situations where abortion is a proper thing to do, imho.
    I will never agree, though, that being inconvenienced is one of them, and I suspect that quite a few abortions would never happen if the potential candidate for one had to actually see what was going to happen, how, and what the result would be. That's why I support that requirement, too...
    It tends to humanize a process that's been de-humanized....I just can't see humanity being a bad thing....
    I think we'd all be better off if personal responsibility got as much support as abortion does...but that would require a sea change in attitude from one segment of the population, and such a sea change would not be very 'progressive'....

    I can't recall you saying if you're still on the job, but if so, my hat's off to you.
    It's a tough job to do, and the many positives of it certainly override any single issue disagreements, to me.

     
  • carlosrponce posted at 4:57 pm on Mon, Aug 18, 2014.

    carlosrponce Posts: 2515

    So they're not "Abortions R Us?" Lila Rose would disagree with your assessment.

     
  • carlosrponce posted at 4:53 pm on Mon, Aug 18, 2014.

    carlosrponce Posts: 2515

    When I get to Heaven, I'll ask them for you. Chances are God intended us to live for a while on Earth BEFORE going to Heaven. In either case, Thy will be done.

     
  • NurseJayne posted at 4:01 pm on Mon, Aug 18, 2014.

    NurseJayne Posts: 343

    Perhaps, George, you do not understand the difference between unintended sex and unintended pregnancy.

     
  • sverige1 posted at 3:46 pm on Mon, Aug 18, 2014.

    sverige1 Posts: 3574

    Response to gecroix posted at 3:30 pm on Mon, Aug 18, 2014:

    Well, geocroix:

    These abortion rights folks have already made up their minds to abort, and no amount of middle-America or "Christian" advice is going to change their decision. None of our influence will make them the upright individuals we wish them to be. Their education likely ended somewhere between K-12th grade and their teachers and (maybe) their parent(s) tried.

    So, we are left with society in the long-run needing to deal with the potential of having an unfit mother and very likely no father. So, wouldn't it be best in the long-run if this little one wasn't presented in this world in the 1st place? After all, the loss of these unwanted children would be less on the governmental dole, less folks growing up to be "progressives". Less Democrats, in your folks' views. As I've mentioned before...let's be honest. The less "unwanted", the better.

     
  • sverige1 posted at 3:39 pm on Mon, Aug 18, 2014.

    sverige1 Posts: 3574

    Ponce -
    Planned Parenthood is not "Abortions R Us"...it's much more. Again...fear tactics from the fringe "right", as your words are reflecting as such. The offices of Planned Parenthood indeed have information regarding the planning of the family unit. They have brochures, pamphlets, classes that pertain to the issue of family planning. They also have public speakers who try to educate our youngsters about making the right choices. As an educator, I'm sure you appreciate the efforts that such instructors put forth.

    Now, do all of the recipients (i.e. students) take the advice and follow through with wise choices? No. But, neither did the geography/history students to whom you bestowed your professional instruction upon. That's how life is. Oftentimes our youth does things we don't like. We have to help them along with sometimes tough decisions that hurt in the short run, but are the best decisions in the long run. Again....if you think things are bad with much of our own youth running around with delinquent behavior and if you think our borders are overrun with children from the "criminal" element, think about the thousands of people who would be on this earth doing the same if a teen in angst had not made the tough decision to sacrifice her child.

    Mothers "teaching their daughters where babies come from"....oh, if it were only THAT easy, then the unwanted pregnancy problem would be licked. BTW...where are these fathers (baby daddies) in this equation? Sometimes, they are or are not part of the "choice".

    BTW...the other Planned Parenthood for folks closer into Houston: 4600 Gulf Freeway Houston, TX 77023 ...take N. Wayside exit, make U Turn on Lockwood/Ernesntine and you'll see the building that looks like a "cash register".

     
  • gecroix posted at 3:30 pm on Mon, Aug 18, 2014.

    gecroix Posts: 3000

    Forced sex is a CRIME. There's no 'fine line' to crime...
    The person doing the forcing has committed a criminal act, and should be punished for it.

    Once we get so desensitized, if we are not already, that 'less than ideal' is all that's needed to justify killing, then we're just a small justification away from deciding that our 4 year old is no longer convenient, no longer 'ideal', or perhaps dear old Mom is now ill and in the way of a vacation trip...

    What the 'justification' of killing for convenience amounts to is pretty much the same thing as trying to be just a little bit pregnant.

    I get plenty of flack from my right of me friends for my opinion that pregnancy resulting from a criminal act IS MOST DEFINITELY a reason for a legal abortion, as is REAL danger to the health of the mother's health.
    Convenience, though? Oops, I screwed up, so I'm going to kill a human life because I may not get to go to as many parties or buy as nice a car?
    That's just....well, Orwellian...at best....

     
  • pflinn posted at 3:14 pm on Mon, Aug 18, 2014.

    pflinn Posts: 252

    Yes, you could say that. Definition #2 in Webster's says," to come into being as an event, process, or result."

    Definition #1 in Webster's says "to occur by chance." That is the definition I was referring to-- the preferred definition. Sentence: It just so happens that I am passing by your house on the way home.

    No two words are exactly the same except flammable and inflammable.

     
  • carlosrponce posted at 2:53 pm on Mon, Aug 18, 2014.

    carlosrponce Posts: 2515

    I was an unplanned pregnancy. My mother was not abused. She was a young mother under the impression that she could not get pregnant while nursing her first born- my brother. I was a pleasant surprise for my parents.
    As a teacher I have learned that many of our teen mothers thought they could not get pregnant having sex the first time or if she has not had her first period or if she has sex during her period.
    Other reasons for unplanned pregnancies include using contraceptives inconsistently or incorrectly.
    I am certain that your information is correct for some unplanned pregnancies but not all.

     
  • NurseJayne posted at 2:23 pm on Mon, Aug 18, 2014.

    NurseJayne Posts: 343

    There is a very fine line between unplanned pregnancies and planned pregnancies. Obstetricians often define unplanned pregnancies as pregnancies that occur despite a couple's attempts to avoid pregnancy. In many cases, a surprise pregnancy occurs in a situation where having a child is less than ideal. This can happen in many ways, and there are many different causes of unplanned pregnancy.

    http://womenshealth.answers.com/motherhood/potential-causes-of-unplanned-pregnancy

    Unplanned pregnancy is common. About 1 in 2 pregnancies in America are unplanned.

    Unplanned pregnancy is common among abused women. Research has found that some abusers force their partners to have sex without birth control and/or sabotage the birth control their partners are using, leading to unplanned pregnancy.

    https://www.womenshealth.gov/pregnancy/before-you-get-pregnant/unplanned-pregnancy.html

     
  • sverige1 posted at 12:39 pm on Mon, Aug 18, 2014.

    sverige1 Posts: 3574

    Response to gecroix posted at 9:45 am on Mon, Aug 18, 2014:
    "The dead would no doubt disagree, if they could."

    Such a statement leads to perhaps an interesting question. Let's imagine for a moment there exists an afterlife for terminated babies. In this "afterlife", let's say there's an opportunity to ask some of these terminated babies if they wished they were instead born to completion of birth on earth. Who's to say that many of them would be glad to have not suffered on an imperfect "earth" environment. For all we know, the "afterlife" of terminated unborn babies could be a delightful one.

     
  • carlosrponce posted at 11:49 am on Mon, Aug 18, 2014.

    carlosrponce Posts: 2515

    definition of "happen" from Houghton Mifflin v.verb
    To come to pass, To come about as a consequence; result.
    To be the fate; become.

    Can we say "Pregnancy came about as a consequence......."? Remember, I'm just a Math and History teacher. You're the expert.

     
  • pflinn posted at 10:47 am on Mon, Aug 18, 2014.

    pflinn Posts: 252

    Pregnancy doesn't just "happen."

     
  • gecroix posted at 10:35 am on Mon, Aug 18, 2014.

    gecroix Posts: 3000

    If it's forced and not consensual, it's a CRIME!

    Of course, NO pregnancy is accidental...unless one believes that old saw about 'Oh, excuse me, ma'am, we seem to have fallen down and my private parts have contacted yours.....'
    [beam][beam]

    (cleaned up a bit for a family newspaper)

    Look, ANYBODY can get BC pills cheap/free and if non-ambulatory they can even be mailed to you and if you are off the grid there are ways to even have them brought to you.
    Far as I know, though, you still have to actually swallow them by yourself, so it's not a 100% responsibility free thing...

     
  • carlosrponce posted at 10:25 am on Mon, Aug 18, 2014.

    carlosrponce Posts: 2515

    Again, poetic license:
    be·fall (b-fôl) v. be·fell (-fl), be·fall·en (-fôln), be·fall·ing, be·falls
    v.intr. To come to pass; happen.
    v.tr. To happen to. See Synonyms at happen.

    The definitions do not infer forced or non-consensual sex in context of the sentence.

     
  • pflinn posted at 10:05 am on Mon, Aug 18, 2014.

    pflinn Posts: 252

    "Many young women who have befallen upon pregnancy..." Interesting verb, "have befallen upon." It is used often to describe people who may have been victims of circumstance, rather than their own actions, as "befallen upon hard times," describing being out of a job or money.

    I would not have chosen that verb to describe 'accidentally' getting pregnant, except in the case that sex was forced and not consensual.

     
  • gecroix posted at 9:45 am on Mon, Aug 18, 2014.

    gecroix Posts: 3000

    Yes. Good article. Some inconvenient truths for 'progressives'.

    Another one:
    'War on women', indeed. By...women...no, 'progressive' women, as there are still women who are not monolythic automatons who think killing for convenience is a good thing.
    In a 'war', someone chopping or burning babies to death, or sticking a bayonet in their brain, would be shot on the spot, or hung.
    Here, in this 'fundamentally changed' country, the Convenience Killers sqwauk like a bunch of demented parrots about THEIR 'rights', as if only they are involved.
    The dead would no doubt disagree, if they could...
    Give up a couple of double lattes or a cheeseburger and fries each month, and BUY your darn BC pills at WalMart for about 10 bucks.
    Can't find 10 bucks, and Planned Parenthood is not next door, so it's too far to go?
    No excuse....get your BC pills MAILED to you by them...even free...

    http://www.plannedparenthood.org/planned-parenthood-heartland/patient-resources/c-mail
    http://www.plannedparenthood.org/planned-parenthood-heartland/patient-resources/payment-options

     
  • carlosrponce posted at 9:29 am on Mon, Aug 18, 2014.

    carlosrponce Posts: 2515

    "Conception is sometimes the unintended and unwanted consequence of sexual activity."
    Maybe their mothers should have taught them where babies come from.
    Not so easy to find?
    Planned Parenthood is at 3315 Gulf Fwy 3315 Gulf Fwy Dickinson, Texas
    Maybe they should stick to their name "Planned PARENTHOOD" instead of "Abortions R Us".

     
  • sverige1 posted at 8:17 am on Mon, Aug 18, 2014.

    sverige1 Posts: 3574

    Well, I get the notion that most folks who write articles about the "virtues" of being a single parent haven't visited the barrios nor the "hoods" where the beautiful images of a tow-headed baby being born simply don't exist.

    Many young women who have befallen upon pregnancy don't have a lovely bridal registry at Babies R US that their wealthy relatives with time on their hands have gifted through the internets. The young women in question from this article are likely going to have a tough time feeding their child, housing their child, educating their child. It very likely is that the decision to terminate the child is done through great familial strife and decision-making.

    As lovely as it is to hear stories of great-grandmothers buying school supplies for their grandkids that have been bestowed upon them, again, not too many folks have such luxury. A word called "reality" sets in. That's why women need to choose. An awful lot of unborn children who don't make it into this world are spared a lifetime of misery. That's why the Republicans have waged such war for over 40 years now. They simply don't know the realities of life without money. The Democrats, to some extent, are cognizant of the struggles. Ipso facto....we voters have the choice between reality (democrats) and privileged lawmakers trying to tell people what's best for them (republicans).

     
  • NurseJayne posted at 7:28 am on Mon, Aug 18, 2014.

    NurseJayne Posts: 343


    "But everyone ought to accept the responsibilities for his or her actions, and conception of life is sometimes a natural and beautiful consequence of sexual activity.


    Women who are unwilling or unable to raise their babies always have the option of offering them up for adoption to women who long to be mothers but are unable to bear children."

    Conception is sometimes the unintended and unwanted consequence of sexual activity. Women should not have to offer themselves up as a nine month incubator if they do not wish to bear a child.

    To dismiss nine months of pregnancy is to completely ignore the rights of the woman. You cannot dismiss her rights.

    And while you may consider medication 'easily available at Planned Parenthood', it's not so easy to find Planned Parenthood any more. In fact, most of them have closed in Texas.

     
  • carlosrponce posted at 6:05 am on Mon, Aug 18, 2014.

    carlosrponce Posts: 2515

    Request: Can someone forward a copy of this column to Sandra Fluke? Words of Wisdom.