|
13 Aug 08 - 10:45 PM (#2413114) Subject: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: michaelr Just got this from MoveOn.org - unbelievable: Dear MoveOn member, Can you imagine living in a place where birth control is considered an "abortion" and health insurers won't cover it? Where even rape victims are denied emergency contraception? It seems unbelievable, but the Bush Administration is quietly trying to redefine "abortion" to include birth control. The Houston Chronicle says this could wipe out dozens of state laws that protect women's reproductive freedom and protect rape victims.1 Access to basic health care for millions of women would be jeopardized. And it's being pushed as a "rule change"—meaning, it doesn't need congressional approval. Can you sign an emergency message to Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt, whose department is considering this rule change right now? Tell him: "Contraception is NOT abortion. The Bush Administration's proposal to change the definition of abortion and reduce women's access to birth control must be stopped." Clicking here will add your name to this message: http://pol.moveon.org/contraception/o.pl?id=13468-1452401-ZLsDGlx&t=4 The best way to beat back this proposal is to show Secretary Leavitt massive public outrage—that's why today we're launching this petition jointly with Planned Parenthood Action Fund. Together, we'll deliver every signature to Leavitt. You can help add to our momentum by forwarding this message to friends. Here's what some others are saying about this proposal: The draft regulation would define birth control as abortion...it could deny access to critical family planning for women across the country.—Letter signed by Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and 26 other senators.2 The draft rule could void laws in 27 states that require insurance companies to provide birth control coverage for women requesting it [and] laws in 14 states requiring that rape victims receive counseling and access to emergency, day-after contraceptives.—Houston Chronicle editorial3 The administration needs to stop playing word games with women's health and state clearly they will reject any regulations that will undermine women's access to basic health care.—Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America.4 [It's] a spectacular act of complicity with the religious right... —RH Reality Check, Information and Analysis for Reproductive Health5 The birth control pill, the IUD, and emergency contraception might all become unavailable—illegal—as a result.—Brigid Riley, executive director of a Minnesota teen pregnancy prevention organization6 Can you help send a loud message to Secretary Leavitt that birth control is NOT abortion? Clicking here will sign your name: http://pol.moveon.org/contraception/o.pl?id=13468-1452401-ZLsDGlx&t=5 Thanks for all you do. |
|
13 Aug 08 - 11:21 PM (#2413137) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Sorcha Thank you Michael! |
|
13 Aug 08 - 11:26 PM (#2413141) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: katlaughing I had read about this last week, then got moveon's email, too. The shrub seems bent on wreaking as much havoc as possible before he leaves. This one is unbelievable! |
|
13 Aug 08 - 11:40 PM (#2413148) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Desert Dancer Here is Planned Parenthood's info on the item: click, which has many links to more info. ~ Becky in Tucson |
|
13 Aug 08 - 11:44 PM (#2413152) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Desert Dancer From a Boston Globe editorial: "Under the guise of rules to protect antiabortion nurses and doctors from discrimination in hiring, a proposed new regulation would expand the definition of abortion to include any form of contraception that can work by stopping implantation of a fertilized egg in the uterus. This can include common birth-control pills, emergency contraception, and the intra-uterine device, or IUD. Doctors who refuse to perform abortions for reasons of personal conscience already are protected by law." ~ Becky |
|
14 Aug 08 - 12:11 AM (#2413164) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: robomatic You know who does the most abortions? God |
|
14 Aug 08 - 12:25 AM (#2413171) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Peace The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits. |
|
14 Aug 08 - 12:42 AM (#2413178) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Barry Finn I saw this too & at 1st had to check to see if it wasn't one of those online jokes, found out it's not only a joke but so's the source. The White House is now the officially the "Federal Funny Farm" Barry |
|
14 Aug 08 - 12:56 AM (#2413187) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Kent Davis A careful reading of the above shows that it is misleading to say that the Bush administration is equating contraception and abortion. It is equating SOME practices commonly called "contraception" with abortion. The administration is not, for example, equating condom use with abortion. Nor is it equating vasectomy or tubal ligation or the rhythm method or coitus interuptus or celibacy or "combination" oral contraceptives with abortion. The practices in question are "morning after" pills, progestin-only pills, Depo-Provera, and IUDs. These practices can sometimes actually prevent conception but they also sometimes allow conception while preventing implantation. Preventing implantation results in the death of the conceptus. Therefore, calling these practices "contraception" is misleading. I have had more than one fervently pro-life patient learn, to her horror, that what her gynecologist prescribed for her as "contraception" would be more accurately called "contra-implantation". Although these practices are not usually called abortions, they do exactly what anti-abortion advocates object to: they kill the conceptus. Regardless of one's views on abortion, surely we can agree that marketing an anti-implantation technology as if it worked solely by preventing conception is, at best, consumer fraud. Kent |
|
14 Aug 08 - 02:14 AM (#2413214) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Richard Bridge Hmm, might lead to an increase in interest in oral or anal sex (preferably in that order) |
|
14 Aug 08 - 02:37 AM (#2413229) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Kent Davis, Are you one of those people who is against certain things because you feel they might be steps toward a slippery slope? I usually am not. But your last post showed me a view of such a slippery slope that must look very tempting to the type of knuckleheaded fundamentalist that would approve the rule change described in the Moveon memo. The de facto Bush Administration line on contraception seems to be "Its wrong. It promotes promiscuity." Their AIDS funding in Africa shows that. So the culture warriors they have illegally placed throughout the government are fighting against contraception. |
|
14 Aug 08 - 03:37 AM (#2413262) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Joe Offer Well, Kent is quite correct. The usual methods of birth control - condoms, "the pill," tubal ligation, and vascectiomy - prevent the fertilization of the ovum. The methods Kent specified prevent the implantation of the already-fertilized ovum, which is a different matter more akin to a miscarriage. And yes, I suppose you could call it abortion, but that's adding a lot of "spin" to it. I don't really have an opinion on things like the "morning after" remedies - but one could certainly argue that they are something other than contraceptives, since the common definition of conception has already taken place. I do think it's preferable to prevent conception in the first place - there's far more moral clarity in the decision, then. Seems to me that the liberals can be every bit as blind and doctrinaire as the conservatives on this issue. This is not a black-and-white, right-and-wrong matter, despite what both sides of the issue like to say. To my mind, the "MoveOn" message sounds as much like propaganda as the "pro-life" stuff does. I stopped subscribing to the MoveOn e-mails because they were all "We're right and they're wrong" ideology. Made me ashamed to call myself a liberal. -Joe- |
|
14 Aug 08 - 05:24 AM (#2413298) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Richard Bridge Cobblers. Sex good Abstinence bad And that's from someone who does far too much abstaining. |
|
14 Aug 08 - 05:51 AM (#2413305) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor The legal definition of contraception versus abortion is clear enough isn't it? So now the Prude Patrol wants to change the legal definition of contraception and abortion to change the law. Is it ever the President's job to change the law? Mr. Bush!?? What did the Constitution ever do to you? Why do you hate it so? |
|
14 Aug 08 - 06:21 AM (#2413318) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Ruth Archer Depo Provera and the IUD (the one that uses hormones) only have the prevention of implantation as a SECONDARY function. Their PRIMARY function is still contraception. |
|
14 Aug 08 - 07:29 AM (#2413342) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Bobert Well, I reckon the next step is makin' male masturbation illegal becuase it also is abortion... "Them sperms 'sposed to make babies, Johnny, so you leave 'um in there for that purpose, ya hear..." (spit) B~ |
|
14 Aug 08 - 08:30 AM (#2413399) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Ruth Archer Every sperm is sacred Every sperm is great When a sperm is wasted God gets quite irate... |
|
14 Aug 08 - 08:50 AM (#2413409) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Bobert There we go, boys... God don't want you doin' that stuff... Plus, it'll make you blind... Sho nuff will... B~ |
|
14 Aug 08 - 09:00 AM (#2413421) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Donuel It is true, in these final days of the Bush administration, they are throwing all sorts of bones to the fundalmentalist christians. The NIH has recently had to respond to a flurry of radical Bush health decrees that are unconstitutional to at least one ammendment and as as many as 3. Political appointees with as much medical knowledge as 'FEMA Brownie' had with hurricanes, are piling on with shocking ignorance and divine decree. My best friend has done what she could to temper or sideline the worst of these new illegal Bush rules as well as these new road blocks to scientific inquiry and free speech. These comments reflect first hand knowledge and is not my typical fare of editorial satire. I have mentioned this recent surge against science and medicine before. Even travel is banned to scientists who might discuss subjects that "are against the American way of (pro) Life". Funny that Bush went to China, the abortion capital of the world, anyway. |
|
14 Aug 08 - 09:41 AM (#2413467) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Bee Kent is NOT 'quite right'. There is considerable biological evidence that he is not right. I refer those interested in understanding how IUDs and Plan B (morning after pill) work to the following articles, written by a biologist who actually understands reproduction at its very beginnings. http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/04/why_the_wingnuts_hate_plan_b.php http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/08/blurring_the_distinction_betwe.php |
|
14 Aug 08 - 09:44 AM (#2413470) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly Thanks for being voices of reason, Joe and Kent. |
|
14 Aug 08 - 10:45 AM (#2413540) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Bobert Voice of reason??? Sounds to me like the "abstainance only" philosphy of the Bush administration is the only accepted birth control practice that some folks can accept... Very narrow minded... And not at all realistic... Might of fact, very Talibanish... B~ |
|
14 Aug 08 - 10:54 AM (#2413549) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: frogprince A question for those who have moral issues with the use of an IUD or a morning after pill: Should doctors report miscarriages to the legal authorities, so that a criminal investigation can be conducted? An already-conceived human organism perishes in the event of miscarriage; what of the possibility that the mother may have contributed to that, by criminal negligence in failing to take proper care or even by intentional misconduct? |
|
14 Aug 08 - 11:06 AM (#2413568) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Bee Please at least read the information in the first article I linked to above. The 'morning after pill', sometimes called 'Plan B', does not affect implantation. It prevents/delays the ovary from producing an egg at what may be an extremely inconvenient or stressful time (forexample, after a rape, or aftercoercive intercourse of any kind)for an individual woman. Bad enough that many want to restrict women's access to reproductive control alternatives, worse that they try to use the public's general ignorance or misapprehension of human reproduction to further their aims. |
|
14 Aug 08 - 11:14 AM (#2413577) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly Bobert, is that really how you read Joe and Kent's posts? People have tried to stop the killing of babies for over thirty years now without success. I think it's safe to assume that you're going to be able to keep your "reproductive freedom" for another thirty years or so. Right now you can kill your babies all the way from conception, right up to the very point of delivery. How much more free do you want it? |
|
14 Aug 08 - 12:58 PM (#2413710) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: PoppaGator I received the MoveOn email, and signed the petition, erlier today. My take is that the Republicans in the outgoing executive branch are doing what they can to maximize profiteering by the health insurance industry while appealing to their favoriate sector of the electorate ~ those whose fear and hatred of sexuality trumps every other issue, and can be easily used to influence them to vote agaisnt their own economic interest. |
|
14 Aug 08 - 01:17 PM (#2413744) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Bobert Yeah, John, it is... The new strategy to take out roe v. wade is to go for broke and attack the entire idea of birth control, short of abstainance... The roe-haters have put together a concerted effort of late to do just that... Even Fian Rheame had one of these roe-haters on her show today... Five years ago this wouldn't have ever happened... This roe-haters have turned the conversation away from roe towardjust about any kind of birth control hoping that in the end "pro-choicers" will circle their wagons and be happy just to any kind of birth control short of Talibanish anstainence... That is exactly what is going down here... Don't take a weatherman to tell which way the wind blows... Hey, I can be very open and willing to find middle ground but the pro-lifers have no flexibility... They are like brownshirts... They are true beleivers... And after Roe it will be what kind of clothes are acceptable... The are 100% intoleramt... Juast like the Taliban... No rrom for compromise... Just their way our the highway... They all need to go back and reaquiant themselves with why the US is the US rather that the colobies... B~ |
|
14 Aug 08 - 01:23 PM (#2413757) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Amos Anyone who believes that moral codes should be the business of governments is encouraged to move to countries where such practices are part of the system. In the UNited States, such purely moralistic proscriptions have NO place in government. Anyone who tries to weasel them into the halls of government should be required to memorize the Bill of Rights verbatim and pass a close exam on the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. THis is just meddling, AFAIAC. A |
|
14 Aug 08 - 01:30 PM (#2413769) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly Bobert, One side will stand for nothing but any abortion at any time for any reason. And they have won. That is the status quo. The other side is made up of... ...those who don't believe in abortion-as-birth-control ...those who don't think that a baby should be ground into parts and sucked out when, if labor was induced, that baby could survive. ...those who don't think it's right to induce labor and then kill the exiting baby before it makes it all the way out of the birth canal. ...and, yes, even those who don't think that "birth control" that aborts an implanted fetus is "birth control". And now you are telling me that the first side -- the one that has had their way for over thirty years killing over 40 million babies and will consider NO restrictions -- is the side that represents moderation and compromise? |
|
14 Aug 08 - 01:32 PM (#2413775) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly Anyone who believes that moral codes should be the business of governments is encouraged to move to countries where such practices are part of the system. In the UNited States, such purely moralistic proscriptions have NO place in government. Anyone who tries to weasel them into the halls of government should be required to memorize the Bill of Rights verbatim and pass a close exam on the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Moral codes always have, always will, and always should inform our laws. Without them we wouldn't restrict murder, theft, rape....basically, anything. |
|
14 Aug 08 - 01:34 PM (#2413778) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor The person calling the impedance of a probably not yet fertilized egg "killing a baby" is speaking for "reason". Is that where the level of discourse should be? |
|
14 Aug 08 - 01:35 PM (#2413780) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Amos Yeah, fair enough, John Hardly. If an unmarried couple conceives, is the foetus an illegal immigrant? A |
|
14 Aug 08 - 01:36 PM (#2413781) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly Bobert, One side will stand for nothing but any abortion at any time for any reason. And they have won. That is the status quo. The other side is made up of... ...those who don't believe in abortion-as-birth-control (but don't have any problem with the logic of abortion in the case of rape or incest or the life of the mother) ...those who don't think that a baby should be ground into parts and sucked out when, if labor was induced, that baby could survive. (but don't have any problem with understanding the logic of abortion in cases of rape or incest, or for the life of the mother) ...those who don't think it's right to induce labor and then kill the exiting baby before it makes it all the way out of the birth canal. (but don't have any problem with not limiting any form of birth control up to a point) ...and, yes, even those who don't think that "birth control" that aborts an implanted fetus is "birth control". (but don't have any problem with birth control that does not abort) And now you are telling me that the first side -- the one that has had their way for over thirty years killing over 40 million babies and will consider NO restrictions -- is the side that represents moderation and compromise? |
|
14 Aug 08 - 01:37 PM (#2413782) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Yeah? Just what is the source of this "moral code" that says a fertilized egg is a "baby"? |
|
14 Aug 08 - 01:40 PM (#2413786) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly If an unmarried couple conceives, is the foetus an illegal immigrant? See, and I usually missread "Illegitimate" as "Illegible" not as "Illegal". When that happens to me, I put on my reading glasses. Maybe you otter try the same fix. |
|
14 Aug 08 - 01:46 PM (#2413791) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Bobert That's pure unaltered, 100 proff, bullsh*t, John... It ain't the pro-choicers who are now against bringing down every kind of concievable birth control, short of abstince... If yopu are a pro-choicer the you had better look around at what your cohorts are up to... B~ |
|
14 Aug 08 - 01:51 PM (#2413802) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Yeah Hardly, If yer not fer us, yer agin us heh heh heh. |
|
14 Aug 08 - 02:05 PM (#2413820) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly *I know I'm going to hate myself for this, but* Bobert, Let me try this again. You say that pro-lifers are inflexible (in your words, "I can be very open and willing to find middle ground but the pro-lifers have no flexibility". Nearly EVERY pro-lifer I know believes in abortion in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother. MANY pro-lifers I know, merely want to put an end to both late-term abortions (unless for the life of the mother) and post birth killing (when the baby is accidentally born live). Other pro-lifers I know (just like everyone else I know) know babies born after very short terms and have thus concluded that many abortions are being performed on "viable" babies, and would like limitations on how late an abortion can be performed. In other words, almost EVERY pro-lifer I know is "flexible". Now, to illustrate your like flexibility...which abortions are you willing to have limited? |
|
14 Aug 08 - 02:11 PM (#2413828) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Amos The question, John, is this. The crimes among individuals you describe are a matter of the commons and how it should be organized to provide the maximum of good (life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness) to its participants. The moral codes of government are those of consent by the governed. Birth control, whether contraception or contraimplantation, is an individual choice, and must be chosen according to the moral lights of the individual concerned. The notion that a diploid (if that is the right term for the conceptus) is a legal individual participating in the commons, as distinguished from a personal process in the life of a separate individual, is the core concept being offered by those who think such matters should be dictated by government in the same way that social crimes are encoded. I fail to see the reasoning for this argument. But I see plainly that encroaching in this way on the individual's right to live her life according to her own moral code is a deep violation of the core social contract for the nation. A |
|
14 Aug 08 - 02:23 PM (#2413843) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly But we KNOW that it is human life. In EVERY other case in US law, the burden of proof falls to the one who wants to commit what is counter to life. We don't imprison, much less put to death a person who has not been found guilty by due process. And yet, by your very admission, you don't know when life begins... ...and yet, in your "not knowing" you are claiming for yourself and others the right to kill it. The burden of proof is on the wrong party |
|
14 Aug 08 - 02:25 PM (#2413846) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Joe Offer Bobert, can you cite instances where people who have any hope of getting their way, "attack the entire idea of birth control, short of abstainance"? Sure, there are some marginal freaks who take that extreme position, but your implication is that the Bush Administration is doing this. Do you have evidence? I'm sorry, but I see no credible threat to the "normal" forms of birth control, like pills and condoms and vascectomies and tubal ligations. Your alarmist position just tends to polarize and demonize. -Joe- |
|
14 Aug 08 - 02:46 PM (#2413865) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Bill D 'Almost' all serious attempts to restrict certain birth-control methods are based on religious grounds. SINCE the Constitution says that religion is protected but not required, it follows that NO ONE should be bound by laws attempting to impose religiously based controls on others. I do not care how you attempt to muddy the matter with 'definitions' claimed to be derived from biology, most those who want abortions and 'morning after' pills banned are relying on their interpretation of some particular religious system for their final argument. The answer is simple: Treat the issue according to YOUR conscience when it directly affects YOU, and leave everyone else alone! |
|
14 Aug 08 - 02:52 PM (#2413870) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Bill D By the way...we should not NEED to resort to the Constitution to make common sense, but I'm glad nontheless that it does specify the separation of church & state. |
|
14 Aug 08 - 02:53 PM (#2413871) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Amos We also know that sperm is human life. Cancer, too. Oh, and ova are certainly human life. Why should your definitions be the governing consideration in this question? A |
|
14 Aug 08 - 02:58 PM (#2413874) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Joe Offer Well, from my point of view, life begins when the sperm and the ovum join and begin to multiply. There doesn't seem to be a better place to put the dividing line. So, for me, any destruction of that mass of cells, is taking a life. That's my perspective, although I'm quite open to other positions. But we take life for a number of reasons, and some of those reasons are very good ones - so I do not rule out the necessity of abortion in certain circumstances, even if it does mean taking a life. However, I think there are always seriously negative implications to taking a life, so the decision to have an abortion must be taken very seriously. Now, the left-wing extremists among you will call me an anti-abortion nutcase. You right-wing extremists will call me a baby killer. But I'm neither. Neither extreme is going to win in this debate. If you wish to keep a rigid, "take-no-prisoners" stance, you can hold onto the belief that you are right. And although you may go to your grave being reight, you will never make any progress. This is a discussion that demands compromise, tolerance, and understanding. I think abortion is always a very sad thing and a cause for grief, even when it is a necessary decision. I would like to see a reduction in the number of abortions, but I would not like to see any sort of prohibition and resumption of black-market abortions. I think the best remedy is responsible birth control - most effectively and responsibly done before the act of sexual intercourse. And Bobert, I'm still waiting to see evidence that there is a credible threat to the practice of such birth control. -Joe Offer- |
|
14 Aug 08 - 02:59 PM (#2413877) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly Tell you what, Amos, You grant me that you believe in the immaculate conception and I'll grant you that sperm and ova are human life in the same way the two joined together are. You're venturing to win a debate. You'll win here (on the mudcat, and against me) because that kind of reasoning works here. But it also proves that debate is not always a good means of finding truth -- just who is better at bullshit. |
|
14 Aug 08 - 03:07 PM (#2413887) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: katlaughing One side will stand for nothing but any abortion at any time for any reason. And they have won. That is the status quo. Every pro-choice person I have known and worked with, would vehemently disagree with this broad brush statement, John. And, it has certainly NOT been the status quo. No doctor of any kind will just blithely perform late-term abortions at the drop of a hat, nor will any woman. It is a serious and potentially fatal surgical procedure for the woman to say nothing of the psychological and spiritual implications. It is NOT an easy decision for anyone. The way you put it, you'd think there were women by the hordes demanding an abortion just short of the nine month delivery. BillD, I agree with you completely. Until it is that way, though, I also believe no man should have any say in what a woman can and cannot do with her body. |
|
14 Aug 08 - 03:15 PM (#2413897) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Bobert Joe, My aplogies to you, sir... I had to reread you post several times but your positions are reasonable, as are Kent's... Actually, I don't find myself all that apart from John's but we still do have this divide... I think it is fair to revist why exactly Roe v. Wade came about in the first place... We didn't have these moral positions as much as we had access divisions... Rich and middle class white women were having their little weekends in Mexico (wink, wink) while por woe3mn, both balck and white were bleeding to death in rooms set up behind gas stations... That was the story then... Now we have the moralist who don't even believe in abortion if the mother's health is in danger, of if the pregnancy was caused by rape or incest... These are the folks who are contolling the pro-life debate... They have scared pharmacists from dispersing birth control bills... They have given the green light to nutballs to shopot and kill abortion doctors... They now want every form of birth control made illegal... There was one on Diane Rheame today... Why is it that reasonable pro-lifers don't have the microphone these days... If I were a pro-lifer I wouldn't admit to it because the movenemnt has been taken over by radical Talibanish hut-balls... I think it's way past time for all pro-lifers to reign in these nutballs because these people are making you look bad... And they are getting microphone time, too... Lastly, when I say I am flexable, yeah, I am... I have no problem with parents being involved, I have no problems with comprehensive group couseling prior to abortion, I have no problem with adoption people having a input, I have no problem in sex education being taught to kids well before puberty, I have no problem with making contraceptives more available to prevent pregancies and I have no problems with more Public Service ads that are aimed at cutting down unwanted pregnancies... Actually, for myself, I am anti-abortion unless it was to save my wife's life is in danger but. like Amos, believe that the goverment's role isn't to finf more ways to intervene into our personal freedoms... B~ |
|
14 Aug 08 - 03:25 PM (#2413906) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: katlaughing I have no problem with parents being involved, I have no problems with comprehensive group couseling prior to abortion, I have no problem with adoption people having a input, I have no problem in sex education being taught to kids well before puberty, I have no problem with making contraceptives more available to prevent pregancies and I have no problems with more Public Service ads that are aimed at cutting down unwanted pregnancies... That is the way most pro-choice people feel, imo, with the possible exception of the parents being involved in certain situations. |
|
14 Aug 08 - 03:27 PM (#2413910) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Bobert And I agree with Kat 100%... It's not up to a government , domanated by men, to make these heartfelat descisons for woman as if the women don't have enough intellegence to deal with the complexities of that decision... That is exactly the way the Taliban operates... B~ |
|
14 Aug 08 - 03:36 PM (#2413922) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly No, kat, I am saying that there are no legal restrictions. The status quo is that there are no legal restrictions on abortion. But try to even hint that there should be and that makes you an extremist. The status quo is as extreme as it gets. You can't get any further "pro-choice" than the status quo -- no legal restrictions on abortions. Though rationalized as "fetuses" and "zygotes", KNOWN babies are executed without going through due process. NOBODY aborts zygotes unless chemically. That means that MOST of the millions of abortions are committed against babies with beating hearts and at least mostly formed bodies. KNOWN babies are executed without going through due process. The definition of due process, to the American pro-choice people need be nothing more than "inconvenient". |
|
14 Aug 08 - 03:43 PM (#2413926) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: katlaughing I believe your sources are incorrect, John. Read on: Roe v. Wade is the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that recognized that a woman has a constitutional right to decide whether to continue her pregnancy. The Court also ruled, however, that after fetal viability (that is, the point at which the fetus is able to live outside the woman's body, with or without artificial aid), states may restrict abortions or ban them entirely, except when necessary to protect the woman's life or health. and: How is abortion legally restricted in the United States? * States can restrict abortion or prohibit it entirely after viability—except when necessary to protect the woman's life or health—and the vast majority of states have done so. The most common restrictions on early abortion are parental involvement requirements, state-directed counseling and waiting periods, and limitations on public funding. How many states have parental involvement laws in effect? * As of November 2006, 34 states require some parental involvement for a minor to obtain an abortion; 21 states require parental consent only; 11 states require parental notification only; two states require both parental consent and notification. and, As of November 2006, 32 states require that women receive counseling, which can include receiving specific information detailed by the state, before an abortion may be performed; in addition, six states require two visits to the provider because counseling must be provided in person before the waiting period begins. It is also good to note the following: the abortion rate peaked in 1980 and has been declining ever since. All of the above was from The Guttmacher Institute. More info from that site includes these stats: In the United States, nearly nine in 10 abortions occur in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy and 56% occur in the first eight weeks. Lots more info at that site. |
|
14 Aug 08 - 04:06 PM (#2413944) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Bill D "I think abortion is always a very sad thing and a cause for grief, even when it is a necessary decision....." etc... Exactly, Joe... we need to do everything we can to reduce and avoid gratuitous abortions. Having had to deal with a necessary one [after an amnio-centesis!]many years ago, I know quite well that it is not an easy thing. Even the doctor we had was conflicted, but agreed it WAS necessary. I am just glad we were able to make the decision without interference to make the whole thing harder. |
|
14 Aug 08 - 04:14 PM (#2413952) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Becca72 I agree completely with Kat. I don't know about everywhere but in my home state it is illegal to have an abortion after 10 weeks gestation. From my cold, dead hand they can pry my Depo-Provera. |
|
14 Aug 08 - 05:29 PM (#2414032) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Stilly River Sage Bill D and Kat are correct. John, you've picked up a radicalized version of the topic at hand, one that doesn't represent "the status quo" at all. There are many restrictions upon abortion, from state legislation to the restrictions on federal funds for clinics that offer birth control, and employer meddling with insurance benefits. If you can't afford it, it might as well not be legal or available. For example: usually every time a Republican administration comes into office, abortion is no longer available for federal employees on their insurance, but it is covered by most insurance as a gynecological procedure when politics isn't involved. Why? Abortions are cheaper than childbirth. This is the only time I can think of when the natural inclination of insurance companies to avoid spending money actually does something useful for women. When it is allowed and practitioners haven't been murdered in their homes. My answer to this was to raise my children with information about their sexuality, about birth control and STDs, and we pay for birth control for my college-aged daughter. When you can't afford something, you're less likely to use it. We want her to have as many choices as possible, and that includes choosing when to have her children. We will love her children when the time comes, whenever that time comes, but when she has them should be her choice, not yours. No woman should have to resign herself to the fact that she's now a baby-making machine when she finds someone to love and be intimate with. Human ingenuity has managed to separate sex for pleasure from sex for procreation. This is a good thing. Accidents happen. Yes, accidents. I don't buy the argument that this small collection of cells is a child, it is a small collection of cells that for many natural reasons might not make it to viability, and maternal choice NEEDS to be one of those reasons. Unintended pregnancy can be as terrifying as being told you have cancer or some other life-threatening condition. Pregnancy is a life-threatening condition. It is earth shattering and if you're not ready, can thrust a woman into a world where she doesn't want to go (it also contributes to the horrors of child abuse today.) That is psychologically harmful if you can't make the choice to abort the fetus. Most abortions are in the first trimester, so far ahead of a point of viability that all of these sensational claims of "killing a fetus accidentally born alive" can be seen for what they are--flagrant scare tactics. There was a discussion on Diane Rehm today about this issue, and one woman was discussing these new proposed laws, arguing that "psychological distress" resulting from abortion was a reason for prohibiting abortion. She didn't get far with such a weak argument and specious "studies" behind her; she was clearly grasping at yet another straw to try to remove a procedure that the majority of the population feels needs to be available. They may not like it, but it needs to be available. If we did a reasonable job of teaching our children the truth about sex, disease, birth control and pregnancy, a lot of these abortions WOULDN'T be necessary. But those people who don't want abortions are apparently also afraid of sex and think that telling young people about sex just encourages it. Not telling them about sex simply means they'll try it anyway, but with little or no information about what they're getting into. SRS |
|
14 Aug 08 - 06:41 PM (#2414096) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Bobert That was what I was referring to earlier, SRS... I heard the last 15 minutes of the show and there was one woman who scared the living crud outta me with her radical positions... Very scarey woan, indeed, and this apparently is waht I have referred to here where many in the pro-life movement have gone off the deep end... They don't even want birth control... They want total abstainence unless it is for making a baby... B~ |
|
14 Aug 08 - 06:46 PM (#2414100) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Amos According to a news report on NPR today, the claims of mental health damage to women by abortion is statistically meaningless. Compared to mental health histories of women who carried unplanned pregnancies to term the incidence of mental health problems is statistically not significantly different. A |
|
14 Aug 08 - 06:54 PM (#2414109) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor I think that Hardly's stream of frantic, nonsensical, divisive, arguments have been firmly dealt with with reason and hard facts. Thank you ladies. Despite his nominal quest for truth, I don't expect to see him challenge your well made points. Getting back to the topic of the thread. It seems to me that the IUD among other methods covered by these "guide lines" have not ever been considered abortion and that while Kent may have made some good points on a technical level. Defining them legally as abortion at the bureaucratic level, seems to me to be a pretty clear case of the Bush administration overstepping its authority. As I said before. It looks like some people who believe in slippery slopes trying to set us on one. |
|
14 Aug 08 - 07:15 PM (#2414121) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Bill D The thing is, some people adopt a stance based on some 'higher principle' that they feel can't be compromised on. Thereafter, ANY reasoning, no matter how awkward, that they can find to avoid admitting how things really are gets used... |
|
14 Aug 08 - 08:37 PM (#2414171) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Stilly River Sage John Hardly is okay, Jack, articulate and thoughtful, though I do find the argument this time surprisingly far right even for John. Repeating the party line without checking its veracity. Statistically it's way off. There are some topics that after we air our opinions we have to agree to disagree. SRS |
|
14 Aug 08 - 08:42 PM (#2414175) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Kent Davis Bee, Perhaps the article you reference, "Why the Wingnuts Hate Plan B", is a fair and balanced bit of medical science. However, the gynecologists with whom I did my residency seemed to disagree with its conclusion regarding the way IUDs and "morning after" pills work. Consider this information from emedicine, a non-political site, one that I have often used in my practice. Notice that even this site, which uses the term "contraception" to refer to these technologies, states that they work not only by preventing conception, but ALSO by preventing implantation, which was my point. http://www.emedicinehealth.com/birth_control_intrauterine_devices_iuds/article_em.htm " How an IUD Works Hormonal and copper IUDs work in different ways. With a copper IUD, a small amount of copper is released into the uterus. This type of IUD does not affect ovulation or the menstrual cycle. Copper IUDs prevent sperm from being able to go into the egg by immobilizing the sperm on the way to the fallopian tubes. If an egg does become fertilized, implantation on the wall of the uterus is prevented because copper changes the lining of the uterus. With hormonal IUDs, a small amount of progestin or a similar hormone is released into the uterus. These hormones thicken cervical mucus and make it difficult for sperm to enter the cervix. Hormonal IUDs also slow down the growth of the uterine lining, making it inhabitable for fertilized eggs." Also notice: http://www.emedicinehealth.com/emergency_contraception/page4_em.htm "How Emergency Contraception Works Emergency contraception prevents pregnancy by stopping or delaying release of an egg (ovulation), blocking fertilization by affecting the egg or sperm, or preventing implantation by making the lining of the uterus inhospitable for pregnancy." Also consider this information about Depo-Provera, from ACOG, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: http://www.acog.org/publications/patient_education/bp159.cfm "Injections may decrease the thickness of the endometrium (lining of the uterus), which can affect implantation (when the egg attaches to the uterus)." Kent |
|
14 Aug 08 - 09:04 PM (#2414187) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: katlaughing Well said, both times, SRS. With all due respect, Kent, I think they are splitting hairs there. |
|
14 Aug 08 - 10:06 PM (#2414213) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Bee Kent, the sites you refer to all have a vested interest in covering their asses in regard to making sure no one can say they specifically didn't mention all medical opinion on the effects of these birth control strategies, thereby eliminating the possibility of someone complaining they were recommended an 'abortifacient' against their religious principles. The site I referred to, while obviously written by a person who disapproves of the current American government, is written by a scientist who, as long as I have read the site and according to the opinion of other scientists and medical practitioners who contribute commentary to the site, is extremely competent and respected in his field. He is not constrained by the need to address the general public in an official capacity, as are the personnel of the sites you refer to. You will believe what you want to believe, but please carefully consider the added burden you wish to place on those women who are not willing to have an abortion, but who do need a variety of reliable and safe methods of birth control. Actual, real, and recent science says it is unlikely that these methods now being called 'abortifacient' are unlikely to act in that fashion. Denying women, including and possibly most hurtfully, women who believe that life begins at conception, these particular alternatives on very shaky politically motivated 'scientific' grounds, is in my opinion reprehensible. And I fervently hope you are not one of those men who wishes to control women's reproductive behaviour while not having a clue exactly how women's bodies actually function and the many, many variables that make one birth control method work for a woman and another not. Narrowing women's choices is a brutal step backwards. |
|
14 Aug 08 - 11:26 PM (#2414245) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Kent, I seriously considered asking "What difference does it make?" But the difference obviously means something to you. Since it is an important difference to some people, shouldn't it be discussed in public rather than sneaked in. Its not like there would be no people in congress willing to put forth the case. |
|
14 Aug 08 - 11:50 PM (#2414251) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor >>John Hardly is okay, Jack, articulate and thoughtful, though I do find the argument this time surprisingly far right even for John. Repeating the party line without checking its veracity. Statistically it's way off. OK, Thank you again though for thoroughly rebutting the bull. Seeing the phrase "baby killer" in a discussion shows me that the user of the phase, is only playing lip service to "reason". |
|
15 Aug 08 - 12:23 AM (#2414262) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Joe Offer I think it's pretty well known here that I'm very active in the Catholic Church. On the issue of abortion, I call myself pro-choice pro-life. In church gatherings, I've argued that if the Catholic Church (and others) really wanted to reduce the number of abortions, they might find a good ally in Planned Parenthood. As I understand it, a Primary Goal of Planned Parenthood is to reduce the need for abortion by responsible family planning. I talked with the local medical director of Planned Parenthood, and he told me his organization works hard to provide alternatives to abortion. But too often, the human issues in this matter are forgotten, because everybody is so concentrated on winning the debate instead of solving the problem. -Joe- |
|
15 Aug 08 - 12:30 AM (#2414264) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: robomatic I think it is just as ridiculous to call a fertilized egg a baby at two days as to call an unborn baby a fetus at 250 days. The more I know the more I respect the "Roe versus Wade" decision. I know some school teachers who would like to put the 'human' stamp on folks only after the sixth grade. |
|
15 Aug 08 - 01:54 AM (#2414284) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity This is an outrage!!..How could they possibly be thinking that?? There should be all the abortions and birth control possible..Made available to everyone over the age of...well, as soon as they get out of diapers!!...I think everyone should have an abortion....especially all those who are for it...but already born! |
|
15 Aug 08 - 05:29 AM (#2414372) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor I think I agree with you robomatic. If you are saying this. The line must be drawn somewhere. It is the woman's body after all and there are serious risks. As I understand Roe v Wade. The decision is that it is against the law to abort a baby which could live on its own except where the is the only recourse to preserve the life of the mother. Its not what one would want in an ideal world. But obviously, this is not an ideal world. |
|
15 Aug 08 - 05:39 AM (#2414380) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor It is interesting that I received this in my email yesterday. A Step Forward on Abortion (by Jim Wallis) I believe that it is part of Obama's promise to be a new kind of President. The platform seems to be to fight abortion by making it rare. There seems to be a lot of buy in for this plan from a high number of women's groups and religious groups. To the people much closer to the front lines of this question, I ask three questions? Is it as Rev. Wallis suggests, a real step forward? Is it something that could actually help (instead of just more entitlements)? Should this be the start of a new thread? I am especially interested in hearing from Kent and Joe and the women who have been so thoughtful on this thread. But of course any insights are welcome. |
|
15 Aug 08 - 06:16 AM (#2414401) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Amergin As the song says every sperm is sacred.... |
|
15 Aug 08 - 06:18 AM (#2414404) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Is that the number one piece of art in the english speaking world on the subject of abortion? Its got three mentions on this thread. |
|
15 Aug 08 - 08:02 AM (#2414457) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Paul Burke If you want to reduce abortion numbers by "making it rare", you are going to have to rethink a lot of policies. Sex education - ignorant people are more likely to get pregnant. Contraception- obvious, but upsets the religious lot, especially if given to kids. Welfare- if you're going to pressure the poor into work, they'll be a lot better off working without bringing up kids. Health care- both parents and kids need it. Immigration- it's a lot easier to stay under the radar if you ahven't got kids. Perhaps sexual practices too- more oral sex = fewer babies? Just say "Mmmmmmfffff...." |
|
15 Aug 08 - 10:54 AM (#2414603) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Marion Hi Bee. It's not clear to me why you consider Dr. Myer's site to be more credible than emedicine.com or the ACOG. It certainly goes against my instincts as a webuser to put more confidence in an individual's blog than in the work of multiple researchers (i.e., emedicine.com) or in statements by a medical association (i.e, the ACOG). If the larger and more "established" sites are more thorough in listing the different possible effects of a drug or therapy, it's a cheap shot to dismiss this thoroughness as just ass-covering - isn't it just as likely that the higher thoroughness reflects a higher degree of accountability to the public and the health care community? As for the difference between contraceptive and contra-implantation: Katlaughing and Jack the Sailor ask why it even matters, and Bee suggests that discussing it is detrimental to women's access to reproductive choices. Although I don't personally believe that the difference between contraception and contraimplantation is ethically significant, I do think there are two good reasons to be conscious of the difference: 1. Promoting individual reproductive choices: rightly or wrongly, some women do believe that life begins at conception and would not knowingly choose a birth control method that prevents implantation. If you prescribe an IUD or postcoital birth control to a woman without letting her know that one of the ways these methods work is by preventing implantation, then you're denying her the opportunity to make an informed choice. 2. Defending reproductive choices in the public forum: it is broadly accepted that some birth control methods sometimes work by preventing implantation. That doesn't mean it's an absolute truth - maybe the consensus will change in the future with new evidence - but right now, that is the consensus. If we deny or ignore that, it makes us look ignorant or deceptive, and the anti-abortion advocates can validly point that out. The debate should be about ethics and the place of religion in law, not about the physiology. Marion (who recognizes the diagram in Dr. Myer's blog from one of my textbooks) |
|
15 Aug 08 - 11:04 AM (#2414613) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Joe Offer Take a look at the Jim Wallis article that Jack the Sailor linked to. It's more-or-less my position on the issue, but Wallis says it better. The change in the Democratic Party platform language is a real ray of hope for me, because it takes steps to include us "pro-life, pro-choice" Democrats. Jim Wallis is a founder of Sojourners, a very interesting social justice lobby. -Joe- |
|
15 Aug 08 - 11:30 AM (#2414635) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Bee Marion, it is my opinion, based on my experience, that larger organizations such as emedicine and ACOG are sometimes prone to careful obfuscating on subjects that may be controversial, as birth control always is. Public accountability includes not offending that very public. This is quite understandable, given their aim is to be trusted and of service to the broadest possible public audience, which aim would be impeded if they were thought to be partisan on such issues. I am in total agreement with your point 1, as you will see from my previous post. On point 2., I believe the physiology is also important, especially given point 1, and I also believe that too much weight has been given to the uncertain science behind the anti-implantation effects of the birth control methods at issue. The site I linked to is not the only (or most recent) source for my information, but I've lost my original resource list to the side-effects of transfer to a new computer. There is a tendency in medicine, I think, to abandon research on procedures once it is established that they do what it is desired that they do. In this instance, there is no doubt that IUDs and Plan B perform as intended: they prevent pregnancy. My old research pointed out that the theories about IUDs causing inflammation and therefore preventing implantation, for example, were educated theories only, and were never actually confirmed. Just because something is broadly accepted does not mean it is correct, or entirely correct. Keeping religion out of law is certainly important, but so is making sure that women, including women whose religious principles are at stake, are truthfully informed about their variety of choices, and that includes bringing older birth control science up to date with modern studies if necessary. |
|
15 Aug 08 - 12:05 PM (#2414666) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Instead of 'making policies' for everybody else, why not decide within yourself how you are going to be accountable for your personal well being..I'll bet abortion isn't in it..I mean, IF you really want the BEST for yourself or your children! I've never talked to a woman yet, who has thought that having an abortion was her FIRST choice, on her road to happiness, and usually has regrets, that she didn't take precautionary measures, rather than having to get one!..(Rape is different, so don't inundate me with that argument). |
|
15 Aug 08 - 12:15 PM (#2414676) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: katlaughing Technically, I did not ask why it even mattered. I just think it is splitting hairs. I do understand the difference between preventing conception and preventing implantation. |
|
15 Aug 08 - 12:47 PM (#2414710) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Guest frm Sanity Kat, Great!1..I respect you for that! So many women can't see that difference..at least BEFORE the act! I get tired of hearing lame people, talking as if we the public should have to pay for their PERSONAL irresponsibility!! Being as this site is primarily for musicians, why not spend more time on perfecting our craft, our gift, instead of making plans to find remedies for prospective stupid acts, of thoughtless and needless heart aches??!!?? |
|
15 Aug 08 - 01:03 PM (#2414733) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Stilly River Sage So many women can't see that difference..at least BEFORE the act! I get tired of hearing lame people, talking as if we the public should have to pay for their PERSONAL irresponsibility!! If sexual ignorance wasn't codified into most public school systems and any frank discussions barred from the public airways, that might be a reasonable observation. But this is a nation where many parents are unable or unwilling to teach their children. We are remarkably Victorian in our sex legislation, so though schools are the place to pass along accurate information, health educators have been severely hobbled by regulations and policies pushed by a small fundamentalist section of the population. They want everyone to see the world in their way, to vilify masturbation and regulate sex and save it for procreation only. They have this influence because they concentrate on subjects that too many Americans are embarrassed to speak out loud about in public venues. SRS |
|
15 Aug 08 - 01:09 PM (#2414744) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity SRS, Right! Irresponsible selfish, lazy parents!! Also, Its none of the government's business as to who, why or when people want to fuck. Nor is it ours to fix their stupid, ignorant, thoughtless problems, arising from being so God damned idiotic!~ya; wanna fuck stupidly, pay the price yourself! |
|
15 Aug 08 - 01:26 PM (#2414772) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: CarolC But they wouldn't be paying the price themselves. Not as long as children are being brought into the world. It's the children who pay the price, and they aren't the ones who have behaved irresponsibly. Some people seem to not realize that there is life after birth. |
|
15 Aug 08 - 01:30 PM (#2414779) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Right Carol!...So get responsible now! Schools out! |
|
15 Aug 08 - 01:34 PM (#2414781) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: CarolC If that post is implying that I need to get responsible myself, I think someone needs to learn some impulse control. Learn to think and ask questions before blurting out the first thing that comes into one's head in order to avoid a serious case of athletes foot-in-mouth. However, just telling people who aren't behaving responsibly that they should isn't going to help the kids of the ones who don't listen. |
|
15 Aug 08 - 01:42 PM (#2414788) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Bee The attitude that getting pregnant and/or having a baby is a 'price' to be paid, or a punishment for sexual activity, or a punishment for being uneducated or careless, really has to be eliminated from the public discourse surrounding birth control. A baby is not a punishment for a woman's behaviour. Forcing a woman to continue an unwanted pregnancy out of a misguided moral notion that she 'deserves' it is one of the more unpleasant talking points I hear. It is a visible part of the public discourse when exceptions to abortion are considered on the basis of whether the woman's pregnancy results from rape or incest. Such an exception makes it clear that the real reason for wanting to limit a woman's access to abortion has to do with the woman's morality, and not the life of a fetus. |
|
15 Aug 08 - 03:15 PM (#2414843) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Bee, Nag nag nag!....The price isn't the child..the price I was referring to was the abortion! (There is a difference) Carol, Your post was not mistaken. I was not in any way saying YOU were irresponsible,..besides, that's none of my business! Neither is having to fund anybody else's. |
|
15 Aug 08 - 03:54 PM (#2414869) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Stilly River Sage Guest, Guest from Sanity, Your shotgun approach to this conversation makes your remarks almost impossible to understand. And Bee wasn't nagging, she made perfect sense. SRS |
|
15 Aug 08 - 05:23 PM (#2414962) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: robomatic I once worked with a group of East Europeans who had emigrated from the Communist world in the 'bad old days'. About one Rumanian woman I was told that she'd had an abortion because she'd received her papers and there would be major problems for her to emigrate with the baby. I didn't know what to make of the story and it wasn't really my business but I don't think she made the decision lightly. On a different tack, I think parents have the right to terminate a pregnancy where the fetus is known to be defective. I'm not talking about nearsighted. I'm talking of Tay-Sachs, spinal bifida, hydrocephalic, etc. The obvious next question is what constitutes a sufficiency of defectiveness? My take on it right now is that it is not for a government to decide. On the other hand, there are societies which are right now exercising that kind of choice - the defectiveness has to do with the lack of a Y chromosome. In other words, huge numbers of abortions have been performed in India and China purely because the baby to be was female. So I'm a bit up in the air on leaving it to the masses, but I feel ultimately it will be self-correcting. |
|
15 Aug 08 - 06:28 PM (#2415002) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: katlaughing Bee, well said and I completely agree with you and with SRS. |
|
15 Aug 08 - 06:44 PM (#2415012) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Donuel Life began on Earth 4 billion years ago. That life may arguably have been exoseeded, making life older still. Simply forgo the chicken and egg nonsense and realize that life derives from life and that all life is contiguous and not subject to silly arguments of life begining with each zygote of each animal. If anyone asks when life began...the most truthful answer is a minimum of 4 billion years. |
|
15 Aug 08 - 07:13 PM (#2415030) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Bee Thanks, kat and SRS. |
|
15 Aug 08 - 08:21 PM (#2415078) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: olddude did you ever notice that BUSH is a four letter word! hmmm if the shoe fits |
|
15 Aug 08 - 10:12 PM (#2415157) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Kent Davis Bee, Thank you for your concern that I might be writing "while not having a clue exactly how women's bodies actually function and the many, many variables that make one birth control method work for a woman and another not." I'm happy to assure you we covered that in the first year of medical school. Kat, I'm a vegetarian. Can you imagine how I feel when I order something in a restaurant and find out, three bites into the meal, that the "vegetarian" dish I ordered actually has meat in it? Call me a hair-splitter, but I don't like being misled, even over a relatively trivial matter such as that. How much worse it is that woman are being misled, by the labels their physician chooses, into violating their own consciences on a matter that is, to some of them, supremely important! It makes me ashamed of my profession. Ironically, those who are most keen to call those technologies "contraception" claim to be pro-choice. Meaningful choice requires information. Mislabeling those technologies as "contraception" obscures the information these women would need to make a choice. Kent |
|
15 Aug 08 - 10:18 PM (#2415161) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Bee I apologize, Kent, if I have misjudged you, but let me assure you that there are plenty of GPs and even gynecologists out there who seem to have limited knowledge of the many variants of women's bodies. Perhaps they skipped those classes. |
|
15 Aug 08 - 11:01 PM (#2415191) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger And this is why the Religeous Right is getting so much politialc support in the C=A issue. From an AP article describing how whites will no longer be a majority in America by 2042. "Whereas, Hispanics are projected to nearly triple their numbers, rising from an estimated 46.7 million today to under 133 million by 2050, out of a projected total US population of 439 million." |
|
15 Aug 08 - 11:18 PM (#2415197) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: katlaughing Kent, thank you. I am a vegetarian, too, and have had that happen to me. I still do not think the difference is that great, and I say that as a woman and a teen mother when contraception and abortion were illegal in my State. Actually, this is the first time I've ever heard any of it referred to as anti-implantation. It is my understanding a woman sloughs off lots of eggs each month, which may be fertile. If that is so...should we restrict women's "moon-times" too? That may sound ridiculous, but no more than what you have brought up, imo. If a woman feels that strongly about conception happening so early, I am sure she lets her doctor know. If not, she ought to and the doctor should support her in that. I have been involved in women's rights for many years and honestly never come across this as an issue before, though. |
|
16 Aug 08 - 01:58 AM (#2415242) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity 'Shotgun approach'?? It was just straight ahead...and still misunderstood. Perhaps with all the 'politically correct' gibberish going on, nobody understands a plain and simple truth anymore...and I'm not getting dragged into a ridiculous, combative semi literate(read: half witted)bunch of wrangling over it either...no matter what gang of wonderful ladies gather 'round to agree on misinterpreting it. |
|
16 Aug 08 - 02:48 PM (#2415530) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Kent Davis Katlaughing, Women do occasionally slough off lots of eggs each month. That's how we get fraternal twins, fraternal triplets, etc. Usually, however, only one egg is released each month. Even if several are released, unless they are fertilized, there is no issue (no pun intended). You say, "If a woman feels that strongly about conception happening so early, I am sure she lets her doctor know. If not, she ought to and the doctor should support her in that." The problem is that sometimes they don't let their doctors know. Why? Because they don't even realize it is an issue. Even you, who "have been involved in women's rights for many years" had "honestly never come across this as an issue before". Neither have many other women. They think that a technology which their doctor calls a "contraceptive" must prevent conception. It doesn't necessarily occur to them that, in some cases, it may work another way. Riginslinger, I fail to see the connection between a truth-in-labeling policy for birth control products and the increasing proportion of Hispanic Americans. Surely you are not implying that you want doctors to trick Hispanic women into using products that they might find morally repugnant, are you? Kent |
|
16 Aug 08 - 04:50 PM (#2415591) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Amos Follow-on mail from Nita Chaudry of Moveon.org: "Wow. Over 250,000 people have signed a message to the Bush Administration saying contraception is NOT abortion. Every signature will be delivered next week to Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt, and the media will be notified of our final signature count. The more folks who sign, the stronger our impact together will be—can you help us break 300,000 signatures? To do that, just think of 10 friends who care about reproductive rights and forward them the message below." (See first post of this thread for link). A |
|
16 Aug 08 - 06:16 PM (#2415642) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: katlaughing Kent, thanks for putting forth your concerns in a reasonable way. I guess I still just don't see any need for the distinction. Contraception to me, and to every other woman I know who has discussed it with me, means NOT getting pregnant/preventing pregnancy, by whatever legal and reasonable means she may choose to use. If it means keeping an egg from implanting, it is still contraception, to me. Bringing it up, if a woman hasn't, sounds to me as if it could just be another form of attack on women's rights, another way for the extremists to sow doubt, guilt and shame on a woman. I don't think YOU are one of those, nor do I think you would do that deliberately, but it does seem another part of their arsenal, imo. |
|
16 Aug 08 - 06:43 PM (#2415670) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Kent, I'm having trouble with what might be a "truth in labeling" problem being turned into an outright ban and also into a redefinition of legal definition of abortion. Its a job for Congress, not for a Bush appointed bureacrat. |
|
16 Aug 08 - 09:25 PM (#2415759) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Kent Davis Jack, I agree that the executive branch is not the most appropriate power to handle the "truth in labeling" issue. The best way would be for individual physicians to take a few minutes to explain things to their patients who request birth control. I'm sure some do, but many don't. As far as I know, there has been no Congressional action. If the executive branch's attempt fails, I expect the issue will ultimately be decided by the judiciary. I predict that eventually someone will bring a big successful lawsuit against her doctor for failure to obtain (meaningful) consent to treatment. Then the malpractice insurers will insist that the truth be told rather than obscured. Kent |
|
16 Aug 08 - 09:28 PM (#2415763) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor I'd rather some pro life Congressman, say Senator McCain, brought it up on the floor and discussed it there, proposed a law and put it to a vote. |
|
16 Aug 08 - 11:07 PM (#2415816) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger "Riginslinger," "I fail to see the connection between a truth-in-labeling policy for birth control products and the increasing proportion of Hispanic Americans. Surely you are not implying that you want doctors to trick Hispanic women into using products that they might find morally repugnant, are you?" "Kent" Kent - I guess I misunderstood the direction of the thread. I don't want doctors to "trick" anybody. People certainly need to have confidence in their health care providors. The fact that Hispanic women might find birth control to be morally repugnant is by itself morally repugnant, and that's where one would need to start, I think, to bring a sense of reason to this issue. |
|
16 Aug 08 - 11:14 PM (#2415819) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: katlaughing Riginslinger, you continue to astound with your seemingly racist remarks. Where did you get the idea that Hispanic women find birth control morally repugnant AND, even if they do, what right do you have to judge them? Do you feel afraid that whites may not be in a majority over the coming century? Do you understand that there are MANY whites who are evangelicals, Roman Catholics, etc. who find birth control morally replugnant? And, that that is okay, for them, as long as they don't try to force their views on the rest of us? |
|
16 Aug 08 - 11:26 PM (#2415823) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger "Where did you get the idea that Hispanic women find birth control morally repugnant..." Kat - Please review the post. I wrote Hispanic women "might" find birth control morally repugnant... And if there is any racism involved in this procedure, it is on the part of those people who are hopelessly addicted to some ancient super superstition (or pretend to be hopelessly addicted to some ancient superstition) so that they think it is perfectly fine for them to go forth and pro-create, all the while contributing to the further over population of the planet. While those people who are more responsible and try to limit their numbers find themselves being systematically crowded out. When confronted with this inconsitantcy, they simply say--"birth control is against my religion." Following that logic, in a few generations the world would have nothing but Catholics, Muslims, and Mormons. Imagine the magnitude of the World War that would lead to. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 01:30 AM (#2415862) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: katlaughing Of for goodness sake, Rigin. Believe me, women have always found ways to prevent pregnancy despite their religion, on their own, though not nearly as safely as the legal methods we now have, but they may have to use whatever they can to make it seem they are going along with their religion. There are enough physical frailties of the human body that the scenario you bring up will not happen, imo. This is to say nothing of the subsequent generations deciding they aren't going to follow in their parents' footsteps/religions. Drought, famine, etc. can have just as much of an effect on large families as small, if not more, so there's several more reasons not to fear such outcomes. I am not putting this as clearly as I'd like, but I really think you are making a mountain out of a molehill. Education and access, not fear, can have a much more profound and positive effect on the world's population, imo. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 08:27 AM (#2415958) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger Education and access have had an effect on runnaway human population growth in Italy, but have you read about what is going on there? If Latin American women have means of controlling the birth rate of their group, then the actions they are engaged in must have a more sinister motive. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 08:58 AM (#2415975) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Amos It seems clear that since the majority of Hispanic women are raised from birth as Catholic, the majority of them might believe that birth control is a sin before God. After all, their God says so This is not a racist remark in particular; the predominance of Catholicism in Hispanic populations is a demographic fact. A |
|
17 Aug 08 - 09:10 AM (#2415980) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger While it's true that ethnicity and race are something bestowed upon an individual over which he/she has no control. Religion is a matter of choice. If an individual is under the impression that birth contol is a sin before god, that's their belief. It's nothing that can't be overcome. What the Latino population is engaged in in the Southwest United States at this time in history is simply "ethnic cleansing" carried on by other means. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 09:33 AM (#2415992) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Amos Ethnic cleansing? What a bizarre notion!! Who do you think is carrying it out, and how, and by what means? Against whom? A |
|
17 Aug 08 - 09:38 AM (#2415994) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly That is a weird perspective. One I'm fairly sure that you share with exactly nobody else. There has always been -- from the time of Margaret Sanger on -- at least a small element of racism and population control of the "wrong" races hoped to be achieved by making abortion more prevalent and accessible. That's not really argueable. But I don't think it's a majority opinion. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 09:55 AM (#2415999) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Bee I hope it isn't a wide-spread perspective, as it's rather horrifying, TBH, Rig. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 10:36 AM (#2416031) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger Of course it's not wide-spread. It's cutting-edge and won't be in the common domain for a while yet. The way things are going, it looks like it's going to get its first hearing in the mainstream press in Italy. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 11:06 AM (#2416053) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Stilly River Sage It seems clear that since the majority of Hispanic women are raised from birth as Catholic, the majority of them might believe that birth control is a sin before God. After all, their God says so This is not a racist remark in particular; the predominance of Catholicism in Hispanic populations is a demographic fact. Amos, statistically the majority of Hispanic residents in the U.S., where this conversation is based, are not still Roman Catholic. Many of them never were, or have changed over to the Protestant religions than have remained Catholic. FWIW. Check the census information for this (I heard it recently on an NPR story). An example, in our family my ex was raised Methodist (but lapsed ages ago); his mother and brother and sister-in-law are Jehovah's Witnesses. My Hispanic daughter doesn't practice a religion. And if there is any racism involved in this procedure, it is on the part of those people who are hopelessly addicted to some ancient super superstition (or pretend to be hopelessly addicted to some ancient superstition) so that they think it is perfectly fine for them to go forth and pro-create, all the while contributing to the further over population of the planet. While those people who are more responsible and try to limit their numbers find themselves being systematically crowded out. Riginslinger, is this actually your opinion or are you attributing it to a collective "they" who hand down such hackneyed racists anti-Catholic dogma? Social Darwinism is alive and well, and this abortion/Catholic discussion is a small part of it. Look at the border fences being built by the U.S. You don't see one going up along the Canadian border, do you? Social Darwinism is the reason for that, and even more appalling, the fence is going up at the cost of more than social issues. Michael Chertoff can ignore any big or small federal regulations he wants to get the fence built. Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act, plus I think they said there are something like 33 separate big federal laws he has ignored and a host of smaller ones. I think I heard this most recently on NOW on PBS. I poked around the radio pages and finally realized I'd actually seen part of the story. It was either here or on Bill Moyer's Journal. SRS |
|
17 Aug 08 - 11:34 AM (#2416070) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: pdq In my small rural area, we have quite a few churches which are meeting grounds for a small handful of people, mostly older ones at that. The Catholic Sunday service is likely to draw about 8 cars full of people, half are Italian decent, the wealthiest group around here. The others are mostly Irish decent. The Jehovah's Witnesses, on the other hand, have 30 or more cars, sometimes 40 plus. And yes, most of the attendees seem to be "Hispanic". Poor ol' Adventists, two or three cars, probably most come on days when they are expected to cut down the weeds. As far as a powerhouse, the Mormon (LDS) folks are the most important here as they actually do stuff, not just talk about it. BTW, the Church of LDS sent heir representatives to Mexico City a couple of decades back and gathered all the birth and death records they could find. The process is still ongoing. The Mormons have better records of Mexican geneology right now than does the Mexican government. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 11:55 AM (#2416083) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly "Social Darwinism is alive and well, and this abortion/Catholic discussion is a small part of it. Look at the border fences being built by the U.S. You don't see one going up along the Canadian border, do you?" Are there tens of millions of illegal immigrants crossing the Canadian/US border? I hadn't read that anywhere. Dang, pretty soon we'll be expected to learn Canadian, eh? |
|
17 Aug 08 - 12:10 PM (#2416092) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger "Riginslinger, is this actually your opinion..." Yes, it's my opinion! "Michael Chertoff can ignore any big or small federal regulations he wants to get the fence built..." Hope he get's 'er done before somebody else takes over. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 12:11 PM (#2416093) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Bee Well, yes, JH, but most of us Canadians don't want to emigrate. There is a people smuggling problem on our border, though it seems to be more Asian based, and is either a booming business or a drop in the bucket, depending on who's reporting the news. And there are indeed 'Minutemen' wannabes on the Can./US border. I saw a very amusing interview a few years ago with an old Maine fella who sits in his lawn chair and keeps a fierce lookout on the border woods next to his place. At the time our dollar was around sixty-four cents US, but buddy was quite convinced ordinary Canadians were sneakin' across to do somethin'... shop, maybe? |
|
17 Aug 08 - 12:12 PM (#2416095) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger "'The Jehovah's Witnesses, on the other hand, have 30 or more cars, sometimes 40 plus. And yes, most of the attendees seem to be "Hispanic".'" You've got to wonder why that would appeal to them, but like I said earlier, you choose your religion. There's no sense in making some kind of affirmative action case for it. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 12:30 PM (#2416105) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly Well, yes, JH, but most of us Canadians don't want to emigrate. Yeah, that's what I'm saying. Maggie is saying that we're building a wall on the southern border but not on the northern border. She's implying by her contrast that we have an immigration problem on both borders. We don't. But we'd certainly welcome more Canadians. Like William Shatner, for instance, eh? |
|
17 Aug 08 - 12:51 PM (#2416108) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Stilly River Sage If we want to prevent all illegal immigration, why discriminate against the northern border? There is illegal traffic, and things can always change and increase that amount. I am certain that it isn't the amount of traffic in the north, I think it is the white faces and the English language of most crossing from Canada that are in the minds of the Bush Neo-Cons when they overlook that broad expanse of unprotected border. SRS |
|
17 Aug 08 - 01:06 PM (#2416118) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly Maggie, I'm sorry, but that's just silly. We are suffering no ills from illegal immigration from the north. We are suffering TERRIBLE economic woes -- from huge outlays for health care and education, to loss of jobs -- from the immigration from the south. And only those wealthy who are taking unfair advantage of the illegals are gaining from the influx -- and they're the very ones you claim are building the walls for racial reasons. Tell you what, you ask labor organizer Mick if the border problem is racial or economic. It has nothing to do with race and everything to do with economics. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 01:15 PM (#2416122) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: pdq You are correct as usual, John Hardly. Without immigration (illegal or not) we have a finite amount of "labor" and the unions can be powerful and make any demands they want. With the Mexican immigration reaching near 40 million, we have, in effect, an "infinite" labor pool and unions are dying. Sorry to those who don't like it, but that's the way it is. And don't blame me, I had nothin' to do with it. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 01:41 PM (#2416144) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Barry Finn Could anyone show actuall & reliable proofs that "we are suffering TERRIBLE economic woes -- from huge outlays for health care and education, to loss of jobs -- from the immigration from the south". I believe this to be myth rather than a truth, please back up your statement with some facts. Barry |
|
17 Aug 08 - 01:47 PM (#2416151) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: katlaughing Me, too, Barry. Around here the Mexican immigrants I see are working their asses off, a lot more than the young folks I see who think they are entitled to do nothing and be supported. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 02:05 PM (#2416164) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger 'Could anyone show actuall & reliable proofs that "we are suffering TERRIBLE economic woes -- from huge outlays for health care and education, to loss of jobs -- from the immigration from the south".' Yes, and it's been presented many times. The problem is, the Neo-Con think tanks who want this cheap migration of labor to continue will happily provide statistics to prove something else. The best analogy in a case like this is made through your own obsevation. Look at the teachers being layed off in California, the hospitals that are being forced to close, the high number of native born teens who are out of work, and see if you can determine what is causing all of this. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 02:11 PM (#2416168) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly Here. Because I know how these things work here on the mudcat -- that is, you ask for documentation as a means of dismissing an obviously true point, and if someone decides to be ambitious enough to go ahead and google up documentation that you ask for, you impugn the documentation... ...for that reason, I chose the link above because, unlike the dozens and dozens of other links I might have provided that show a MUCH greater cost of health care alone -- in California alone -- costs from 9-12 billion dollars a year... ...the link I provided is a liberal pov that is actually seeking to MINIMIZE the economic impact by saying that it's only costing 1 Billion dollars annually. If you didn't want to play the above mentioned mudcat source game, and googled for yourself, I think you'd objectively find that illegal immigration costs BILLIONS no matter how you might want to gloss over -- put the best spin on -- the numbers |
|
17 Aug 08 - 02:23 PM (#2416178) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Amos If you were to add up ONLY the costs of the white native-born population, you would find it is a horrible picture indeed. How much does the illegal immigrant population produce of value, and often at lower cost than the established equivalent labor? How much does the immigrant population pay in taxes (sales taxes, real estate taxes, DMV taxes, city and county taxes, state and Federal income taxes? A |
|
17 Aug 08 - 02:27 PM (#2416182) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly I don't even understand the connection in your first line. What do white native borns have to do with immigration? As to the second... You're asking the questions. You answer. That's how the gotcha game is played. You don't discuss, you source. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 02:28 PM (#2416186) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly Oh, and don't forget the other mudcat rule: Dictionary definitions score bonus points. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 02:37 PM (#2416193) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: pdq "Dictionary definitions score bonus points." Do you mean like "liberal = open-minded"? That definition is the most absurd statement ever posted on Mudcat. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 02:49 PM (#2416203) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: CarolC What's going on in Italy? |
|
17 Aug 08 - 02:49 PM (#2416204) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Stilly River Sage I was distracted earlier and didn't finish my thought. The supposed reason Homeland Security is building this fence and mowing down laws right and left is not because of illegal immigration, it is because of "Terrorism." Now you show me how a vast unprotected border on the north is not going to let "terrorists" through? And why the far-more observed southern border needs so much attention and the north doesn't? It's poppycock. SRS |
|
17 Aug 08 - 03:05 PM (#2416209) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger This is what is going on in Italy. By the BBC: The number of illegal immigrants entering Italy doubled in the first seven months of the year compared with the same period in 2007, Rome says. The figures come in spite of a government crackdown on crime and an increase in the number of deportations. More than 15,000 illegal immigrants entered the EU via Italy between January and July, Interior Minister Roberto Maroni said. Many illegal immigrants arrive on boats organised by people traffickers. Many Italians associate illegal immigration with crime Mr Maroni, whose Northern League party formed part of the right-wing government coalition, has campaigned strongly against clandestine immigration. Most of the illegal immigrants come across the Mediterranean Sea from North Africa. Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi has launched a crackdown on crime, which most Italians associate with illegal immigration. He brought in stringent new measures making it an offence punishable by up to four years jail to enter the country illegally. Prisons full Expulsions have increased by 15% so far this year but the Italian authorities often find the countries of origin of illegal arrivals reluctant to accept them back if they are deported. Two weeks ago the authorities began deploying troops in joint anti-crime patrols with police in some of Italy's major cities. Thirty-three non-EU nationals have been arrested so far. Italy's prisons are already crammed with foreigners. Some 20,000 people out of the 55,000 prisoners currently serving sentences or awaiting trial in Italian jails are foreigners. The number of these foreign prisoners continues to increase because of the expense and difficulty of executing expulsions ordered by the judiciary. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 03:08 PM (#2416213) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Stilly River Sage Amos' point on health care is a slam dunk--don't parse out one group and make it sound like no other group impacts the huge cost of health care. Look at the entire situation first, then draw slices in the pie. There is still a greater strain from citizens who don't have insurance than the impact from illegal aliens. But it all adds up to a huge problem. To bring this back around the contraception and abortion, this is another instance when good information in schools, plus easy access to contraception of choice, would reduce health care and emergency room costs considerably. Fewer trips to the emergency room for uninsured birth mothers. SRS |
|
17 Aug 08 - 03:17 PM (#2416221) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: pdq "20,000 people out of the 55,000 prisoners currently serving sentences or awaiting trial in Italian jails are foreigners." {in Italy} Well, let's see. 55,000 prisoners and 20,000 are illegal aliens, that's 36%. In the United States, 36% of the Federal prison population is Mexico-born and came here illegally. Anybody else beginning to feel kinship with the Italians? Anybody care about the people who were robbed, assulted, raped or murdeed by those prisoners? Hint: they ain't there for being here illegally. Not in Federal prison. Not one of them. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 03:29 PM (#2416226) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: katlaughing Rigin, do you think all native born Californians are white? That's what you seem to imply. To put the whole spending of health care costs in perspective, check out war funding and tell me why the wealthiest country in the world willingly spends BILLIONS on death and destruction, but begrudges ANYONE decent, easily accessible healthcare. esp. preventative healthcare (but, wait, then ERs might not be as necessary!) You want to start bitching about how much immigrants use the ERs, take a look at the irresponsible spending priorities of our government. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 04:03 PM (#2416245) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: CarolC I'd like to see a source for the figure of 36 percent of the federal prison population being Mexican born. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 04:08 PM (#2416247) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: pdq Well then get off yer butt and look. I know them already and it ain't my job to end you ignorance, it's yours. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 04:16 PM (#2416254) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly "Amos' point on health care is a slam dunk--don't parse out one group and make it sound like no other group impacts the huge cost of health care." What makes you assume that a liberal paper like the L.A.Times hasn't already taken that into consideration BEFORE they posted their $1,000,000,000 figure? They WANT you to be right. Why do you doubt them? |
|
17 Aug 08 - 04:19 PM (#2416257) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: CarolC I did look. And they're just not there. Here's my Google search... http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=36+percent+federal+prison+mexican+born&btnG=Google+Search |
|
17 Aug 08 - 04:19 PM (#2416258) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor California would be bankrupt if it wasn't for illegal immigration. The fruit would rot on the vines. Store shelves would go unstocked, building would slow to a crawl, expensive homes would not be cared for, Children would be neglected. So yes. Amos is right. You can't just look at the costs of the immigration. You have to weigh the costs against the benefits. One would think that one shouldn't have to be very smart to figure that out. But genius as he obviously is. John Hardly just wants to look at the costs. He also seems to think that there is a higher source than the dictionary for the definition of words. Ohhhhhhh, the "Mudcat" form of "arguing" is to use the dictionary!!! Oooooh oooooh!! While it is easier to make up one's own definition to suit one's argument or to continue to argue from the point of view from a fallacy rather than just to look something up, choosing ignorance is undesirable and leads to misunderstanding. Solely blaming illegal immigration for problems in the health care system is also presenting ignorance as a default stance. Even in the LA Times article that Hardly used as "evidence" there are indications that the problem is broader. Blaming illegal immigration for the decline in unions is also pretty silly. Too silly to merit rebuttal really. Yeah, go ahead ask Mick, or anyone else in the labor movement, who is more responsible for the decline in labor unions; Illegal immigrants or self described "conservatives" who call unions "special interests" while they vote for legislators who are in the pockets of big business. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 04:28 PM (#2416260) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger "Rigin, do you think all native born Californians are white? That's what you seem to imply." No, I never thought that. And I don't think the majority of the people who have a problem with illegal immigration are all that concerned with legal immigration. The country of origin is not the issue. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 04:30 PM (#2416262) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: CarolC Looks like someone just made up that figure of 35 percent of federal prison inmates being Mexican born. Lou Dobbs has this to say about it... According to the Federal Bureau of Prisons, 30 percent of federal prisoners are not U.S. citizens. So that's 30 percent, and the figure applies to all people who are not US citizens, and not just people who were born in Mexico (and not just from countries with brown skinned people), and it applies to all who are not citizens, rather than just applying to those who are here illegally. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 04:34 PM (#2416265) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger "California would be bankrupt if it wasn't for illegal immigration. The fruit would rot on the vines. Store shelves would go unstocked, building would slow to a crawl, expensive homes would not be cared for, Children would be neglected." Jack - That's the most uninformed proposition I've heard in a very long time. But if it were true, the people who are benefiting from illegal immigration--aside from the immigrants themselves, are the employers--and they would be the ones who have the expensive homes that would not be cared for. So who gives a shit? There's no way to explain why you would think that children would not be cared for. Maybe you could follow up on that. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 04:39 PM (#2416274) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: pdq California has only about 75,000 jobs for full-time farm workers. They are important since skills like pruning trees and thinning fruit is not even taught in the US to any serious degree. The rest of the farm work is done by migrant labor, that is people who go from Imperial county in the south to Washington state in the north as the season progresses. They usually return to Mexico and have families. They are also very importatnt. Both permanent and migrant farm workers are welcome and always have been. It is the other 20 million Mexicans living in California that have reduced Golden State to Third World status. California's educational system is right there with Mississipi and Arkansas duking it out for dead last. . |
|
17 Aug 08 - 04:40 PM (#2416276) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: katlaughing Rigin, yours is some of the most twisted logic I've ever read. You claim not to look at country of origin, yet you mention "native born teens" who are out of work and you inference is this is because of illegal immigrants from south of the border. So...how do you know the teens are "native" born...are they all white as far as you are concerned. Why do YOU think they aren't working? Could it be because they have a false sense of entitlement and don't feel as if they NEED a job? Or, won't do the work that illegals will? Well then get off yer butt and look. I know them already and it ain't my job to end you ignorance, it's yours. That'll sure win ya a lot of debates...if you're going to claim something, it's up to you to cite your sources, pdq...that's elementary. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 04:54 PM (#2416280) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Riginslinger, It was rhetoric. I was being a little hyperbolic. But what I was was essentially true. I think its fair to say that California's economy as it is structured today is quite dependent on Illegal immigrants. The construction industry here in North Carolina also seems dependent on them. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 04:58 PM (#2416281) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: pdq CarolC... There will be some differences is statistics, even from two separate branches of our own Federal government. There are quite a few Mexico-born crimnals who received their citizenship before being convicted of a serious crime. This is especially true of those millions who received "amnesty". The additional 5.7% as "Mexico-born but naturalized citizens" makes the total 35.7% Mexico-born, just as I said. If you want to call me a liar ove 0.3% from "rounding up" you can take a hike. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 05:02 PM (#2416283) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger "So...how do you know the teens are "native" born...are they all white as far as you are concerned. Why do YOU think they aren't working?" Like the man said, "I only know what I read in the newspapers." And statistics that have been published state that the teenaged unemployement rate in America is around 17%, or it was the last time I heard it reported. The same report told the listener that many of the jobs that used to be available to teen workers have gone to illegal aliens--though I suppose they actually said "undocumented workers." For these teens to be showing up in surveys like that, it wouldn't seem they are talking about teens who are here illegally, because that group is represented on the other side of the equation. Some of these teens could in fact be naturalized citizens, and there very well might be a few, but I wouldn't think very many. Not enought to skew the survey, surely. I have no clue as to how many of them are white. I don't think that would have been an issue to anyone concerned. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 05:21 PM (#2416291) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: CarolC The flaw in the reasoning behind the figure of 35 percent being Mexican by birth is that Mexico is hardly the only country from which immigrants come to the US. And the 30 percent figure cited by Dobbs (hardly a champion for illegal immigration) applies to all immigrants, legal or otherwise, and from all of the countries from which immigrants come to the US. Like I said... looks like someone is making up their statistics as they go along. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 05:34 PM (#2416306) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger Well, one thing's for sure, if Lou Dobbs says it, you can take it to the bank. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 05:57 PM (#2416317) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: CarolC It's possible that Dobbs may be incorrect. According to the Federal Bureau of Prisons website, citizenship breaks down in this way... United States: 147,796 (73.4 %) Mexico: 35,033 (17.4 %) Colombia: 3,003 (1.5 %) Cuba: 1,739 (0.9 %) Dominican Republic: 2,933 (1.5 %) Other/Unknown: 10,913 (5.4 %) According to these figures, the percentage of federal prison inmates who are not US citizens is 26.7 percent, 17.4 percent of whom are Mexican citizens. It does not break these figures down into which US citizens are naturalized Mexican immigrants. It does cite a percentage of 31.8 of federal prison inmates being Hispanic, but that's not at all the same thing as being Mexican born. Many Hispanics come from families that have been in the Southwest part of what is now the US for hundreds of years, and have been citizens of this country ever since they were absorbed into it when their areas of origin became US territory. Many are native born US Americans whose parents, grand parents or even earlier ancestors came to the US and established citizenship. And many Hispanics (people who come from Spanish speaking cultures) come from other countries besides Mexico. http://www.bop.gov/news/quick.jsp#2 |
|
17 Aug 08 - 06:16 PM (#2416332) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: pdq Again, no two independent sources will give the numbers, but 27% -36% is far more than you thought before I made the point, isn't it? |
|
17 Aug 08 - 06:47 PM (#2416360) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Do you think that those figures might have something to do with these facts? Most prisoners are incarcerated on drug related charges. Most Heroin in the US comes in from Mexico. Most cocaine (including crack) Comes from Columbia, often via Mexico. I think we need to consider the illegals here as part of drug cartels and gangs as a separate problem than those here to do honest work. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 07:32 PM (#2416385) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger "I think we need to consider the illegals here as part of drug cartels and gangs as a separate problem than those here to do honest work." Why? Illegal aliens in jail, are illegal aliens in jail. Many people come here to do work--none of it honets, of course, if they're illegally here in the first place--and then branch out into other things. Ironically, many gang members turn out to be first generation descendants of illegal aliens. And if they were born here, they wouldn't show up on the illegal radar screen, and won't until something is done to clarify the 14th amendment. But when that is accomplished, the percentage of illegal aliens in jail will probably go way up. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 07:36 PM (#2416389) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger "It's possible that Dobbs may be incorrect." Carol - It looks to me like Lou Dobbs could be described as wrong simply because he was rounding off the number. If one were verbalizing the report, one would probably say "nearly 30%, or in the neighborhood of 30%," and the listener would interpret that as 30%. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 07:46 PM (#2416400) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: pdq JtS...my research shows that 46% of the US federal prison population is there because of violent crime. That leaves 54% for drugs, property crime and everything else. Violence, including murder, is road #1 to a federal prison cell. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 07:49 PM (#2416402) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Stilly River Sage Well then get off yer butt and look. I know them already and it ain't my job to end you ignorance, it's yours. What an absurd way to debate this topic! PDQ says whatever he wants and insists others prove him right or wrong? I don't think so. You want your point to stick, do your own research, but use links to reputable sources. Like John did. SRS |
|
17 Aug 08 - 07:50 PM (#2416403) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger If illegal immigration were to be classified as a felony, as many of us think it should be, and if drugs were to be decriminalized, as many of us think they should be, the numbers would change dramatically. So a lot of this can be said to be a little bit pointless. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 08:04 PM (#2416408) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: CarolC I had no opinion about what the number of Mexican born federal prison inmates would be before it was brought up in this thread. However, 27% -36% is not the percentage of federal prison inmates who are Mexican born. That number is around 17%, according to the information we've seen so far. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 08:06 PM (#2416412) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack The Sailor >>JtS...my research shows that 46% of the US federal prison population is there because of violent crime. That leaves 54% for drugs, property crime and everything else. Violence, including murder, is road #1 to a federal prison cell. You are smarter than that. You know what I meant. You know that most of those violent crimes for Mexican and Columbian nationals are drug related. Or are you saying that they are killing, threating and beating people for gardening and construction jobs? |
|
17 Aug 08 - 08:12 PM (#2416423) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: CarolC LOL If we classify illegal immigration as a felony, and if we hold in our federal prisons all of the illegal immigrants we can catch, we're going to be paying a lot more for their upkeep than we are currently. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 08:16 PM (#2416428) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack The Sailor But we could then use them as a source of cheap labor. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 08:17 PM (#2416429) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: CarolC We already are... |
|
17 Aug 08 - 08:17 PM (#2416431) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: CarolC ...and you have to admit, they house themselves a lot more cheaply than what it would cost to house them in a federal prison. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 08:27 PM (#2416436) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Hey, its still a law...Now if they are going to enforce laws, selectively, can we pick the one law, each one of us, individually can choose to ignore????.. which one would YOU pick??...Just think about it a moment....How about the administration??...all of us?.......OR do we enforce the ones we have??? You pick |
|
17 Aug 08 - 08:27 PM (#2416437) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Bill D ""California would be bankrupt if it wasn't for illegal immigration...." etc. Seems to me that if immigration were controlled and seasonal migrant workers were registered and here by invitation, California could both get it crops harvested AND save a lot of money on enforcement & prisons, etc. Tell me what I'm missing? |
|
17 Aug 08 - 08:46 PM (#2416441) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity You mean, ILLEGAL immigrants would actually register, with a real name?? I know what your saying is true, but the government isn't enforcing that, (its what we used to do),....THE question is, WHY are we not doing it? Hint...(shhh, its a secret)..the government without anyone's notice or approval is having our borders dissolved, and changed.(Hope that's ok with everyone) Ring around the 'W'-Berry Bush, Rama Obama ding dong. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 09:23 PM (#2416456) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Greg B >Bobert, can you cite instances where people who have any hope of >getting their way, "attack the entire idea of birth control, short of >abstainance"? I can. It's called Humanae Vitae, and as of this month it is a 40-year-old train-wreck. "I got rhythm, I got music I got my man Who could ask for anything more?" (A rubber on the man would be nice...) |
|
17 Aug 08 - 09:35 PM (#2416458) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger "If we classify illegal immigration as a felony, and if we hold in our federal prisons all of the illegal immigrants we can catch, we're going to be paying a lot more for their upkeep than we are currently." No! I really don't think so. Of course you'd have to get them on a bus back where they came from as soon as possible. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 09:37 PM (#2416460) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger "I had no opinion about what the number of Mexican born federal prison inmates would be before it was brought up in this thread." I think Lou Dobbs was talking about illegal aliens, which would include Hondurans, Guatemalans, and etc. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 09:41 PM (#2416464) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger "Tell me what I'm missing?" The point! A lot of people think that they need all of these undocumented workers because the corporate mainstream media tells them that. But the cost to the public is huge, and greatly outstrips the benefit of them being here. There are a number of manufacturers who make mechanical grape harvesters, that are used in other parts of the worl, in fact, they used to be used in California, but the illegal worker has gotten so cheap, many places that used them in the past do not anymore. In the long run, it's hard to see how this helps even the undocumented worker. |
|
17 Aug 08 - 10:01 PM (#2416486) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: CarolC I was responding to what a poster said in this thread about 27% -36% of the inmate population in US federal prisons being Mexican born when I wrote the part where I said I had no opinion about the number of Mexican born inmates in federal prisons, So why would having it be a federal offense be any different than having it be whatever it is now, if the people are going to just be shipped back to their countries of origin? |
|
17 Aug 08 - 10:09 PM (#2416491) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger That's a good question Carol. I've wondered that myself. I would think that if a guy is doing bad things, the best solution for the public would be to simply ship the fellow back where he came from. Like that guy they executed in Texas the other day. All they did was piss a bunch of people off, spent a lot of the tax payer's money, and the whole world would have been much more peaceful if they'd just sent him back to Mexico. It's amazing to me that they will hold somebody in a county jail for months and months for Drunk Driving, and then in the end they just send him back. Why would the local tax payers have to pay for that. The same is true for petty theft, illegal posession of marijuana, and on and on. I don't know enough about what it takes to make a federal offense out of something. Kidnapping does it, I guess, but to keep somebody for years and years is just simply stupid, in my opinion. |
|
18 Aug 08 - 10:49 PM (#2417422) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Ebbie The deep down and dirty problem I have with this conversation- whether it concerns the US or Italy or wherever - is that somehow those people who object so vociferously to "illegal immigration" are here or in Italy or wherever only because they found themselves in that spot. Not because of some innate superiority or superlative virtue on our part but by the luck of the draw. Why does anyone proselytize the view that other people, not so fortunate, deserve the slow death of poverty, the violent death of governmental crime, the experience of seeing their children starve? I recognize the logic that says that if everything were shared equally (Ha! Fat chance!), every one of us in the world would be poor. (Not that I believe it, but then I don't have stats to prove nay or yea.) |
|
19 Aug 08 - 12:13 AM (#2417462) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Ohh, just arrest them, then tell them we're going to cut their nuts off, so they can't have anymore 'Catholic' bambinos..that way they'll all run back to the border, and be equal with their senoritas! |
|
19 Aug 08 - 12:29 AM (#2417471) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: CarolC The answer to the problem of the poverty in those other countries is for the US to stop its predatory business practices that are the cause of a lot of it. That would be a lot better than creating a situation in which the people in those countries are obliged to uproot themselves and work for slave wages in a strange country just in order to survive. I have no problem with immigration, myself. I'm married to an immigrant. But we need to be looking at the bigger picture, and see in what way we are harming those people and making it necessary for them to come here to this country in order to survive. |
|
19 Aug 08 - 12:32 AM (#2417472) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Peace Jesus Keriste, Joseph and Mary. First, contraception does NOT equal abortion. So y'all wasted 179 posts arguing a false equation. Which idiots think this stuff up? |
|
19 Aug 08 - 08:27 AM (#2417621) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger "Why does anyone proselytize the view that other people, not so fortunate, deserve the slow death of poverty, the violent death of governmental crime, the experience of seeing their children starve?" Ebbie - I don't know anyone who advocates that view, but if runaway human migration isn't taken into account, everyone on earth, no matter where they are, will face the exact same problems of the people you describe above. The answer, of course, is for the problem of over population to be taken care of at the point where it is occurring. So the Bush policy of trying to equate contraception with abortion is not only hurting his own people, but everyone else on the face of the planet. |
|
19 Aug 08 - 09:23 AM (#2417679) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly Ebbie, why do you think that immigration is not a problem on the North border, but is on the South? Could it be that Canada's government is not so riddled with corruption that its population feels the need to flee and look for survival elsewhere? Why isn't your anger focused on the Mexican government and not on your own? |
|
19 Aug 08 - 09:59 AM (#2417702) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Bobert Ahhhhhh, I took a break from this thread and came back and here the converstaion is back to immigration... Hmmmmmm??? How could that happen??? Abortion and immigration just happen to be the two issues that the right wing wants out front and center and here in one thread they have both??? BTW, where were these righties back in the 90's when immigrants were fueling a steamin' economy??? It's just when things get a little lean that the righties come crawlin' out from the woodwork and get up on the soap box??? Kinda reminds thuis ol' hillbilly of our history of slavery... As long as a certain minority of folks were being good little prisoners and producing lots of stuff all was well but soon as that ended it was "Screw 'um, let them eat cake..." Seems things just don't change eiother for the exploiters or the exploited... B~ |
|
19 Aug 08 - 10:13 AM (#2417711) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger Bobert - It's the right-wing wing-nuts who want unchecked immigration to continue--at least the ones who take advantage of them to generate profit. George W. Bush refused to do anything about it until he absolutely had to. Illegal immigration only fuels the economy for those who are in a postition to take advantage of it. For the rest of us, it's a downer. |
|
19 Aug 08 - 11:06 AM (#2417753) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Ebbie Rig, you say: "Ebbie - I don't know anyone who advocates that view, but if runaway human migration isn't taken into account, everyone on earth, no matter where they are, will face the exact same problems of the people you describe above. "The answer, of course, is for the problem of over population to be taken care of at the point where it is occurring." Over-population, I agree, is the main problem. Back in the rural days in this country large families were not only the norm but they could be essential. That has changed drastically. Having a large family these days is, I would say, irresponsible. The Amish are finding that out. When I was growing up, it was common for the patriarch to buy or give a farm to each son as he got married. And he might easily have had five or more sons. Farming was the most common occupation among the Amish. Nowadays the sons typically disappear into 'trailer factories' or into 'small engine repair' or some such. Many young Amish families are now living on very few acres, just enough for a horse, a cow or two, a few chickens and a big garden. Big families are still common but small families don't attract the attention they used to. I asked my mother (mother of 10) once whether the Amish were against birth control and she said that they don't make an official issue of it. Tradition, however, holds and probably will continue to until the norm becomes glaringly unsustainable. I equate such tradition to the norms and mores of immigrants. It takes time to face up to the realities of over-population. Immigration, whether legal or illegal, to my mind, is a separate issue. I just don't see why borders are fixed and sacrasant. If we were on an island and had to scavenge for food, wouldn't we feed everybody? John H, you ask why I don't direct my anger at the Mexican government, instead of my own. At the moment I wasn't directing my views toward government of any kind. My dismay Oops. My dog says it is time to head outdoors so I'll stop here for the moment. |
|
19 Aug 08 - 11:16 AM (#2417763) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: pdq Fedreal prison population (reason for incarceration): Violent 47% 52% Property 23% 21% Drug 22% 20% Public-order 9% 7% Total 100% 100% {Second row is 2007 stats, I believe, first is an earlier year. Answers a question way back there somewhere.} |
|
19 Aug 08 - 11:36 AM (#2417783) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: katlaughing If we were on an island and had to scavenge for food, wouldn't we feed everybody? Ebbie, I am going to bet you don't watch the TV show "Lost?" :-) |
|
19 Aug 08 - 12:03 PM (#2417799) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger "Immigration, whether legal or illegal, to my mind, is a separate issue." I don't think so. When you have people migrating from places that are over crowed to places that are not quite yet over crowded, I think you have a problem. If the population in the places migrants are coming from was going down, it wouldn't be a serious as it is, but that is not the case. |
|
19 Aug 08 - 12:08 PM (#2417802) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Ebbie lol, kat. No, I haven't. However, I would pick bones over that too. Just as with 'Lord of the Flies', fictional scenarios make gripping stories but they ain't necessarily true. A friend of mine is an avid novel reader and sometimes, imo, loses track of logic and reality. For instance, she once insisted on telling me the story line of this one novel and concluded with, 'As much of an a-hole he was you wouldn't have thought it, but he stepped forward completely out of character and in front of the whole crowd saved her from humiliation.' I said, Mickey! It is fiction! |
|
19 Aug 08 - 12:12 PM (#2417806) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: pdq "I just don't see why borders are fixed and sacrasant." That way of thinking has led to nearly every war in the history of civilization. |
|
19 Aug 08 - 12:14 PM (#2417808) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: katlaughing LOL, Ebbie, ya think?:-) Actually, the folks who were marooned on the island in Lost did band together and pool what they could scavenge from the plane wreck. It's the "others," who were already there, with whom they have had conflict. Think about it, though. If there were a finite amount of food to be found, do you think people would still be altruistic? |
|
19 Aug 08 - 12:34 PM (#2417820) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Bobert Well, as in the big world the "island" does represent a parellel social structure... It isn't as much a popumlation problem as it is a scarcity or resources problem... And that is a real concern on either the "island" or the planet on the whole... As I recall, the boy that was killed ion "Lord of the Flies" was killed not because of scarcity of resources... And of course there is "Skinner's box" where regardless of resources over-population causes anti-socail behaviors... No matter, the discussions thatbare occuring at the levels where they need to be aren't happening becuase of the extreme polorization... Oh well, seems that man really doesn't buckle down to solve problems until they reach crisis level and then, as in now, still isn't too interested... BTW, I live in Menonit country and what Ebbie says is absolutely true... The times have changed and the The Menonites have been slow to change in their family sizes but have figured out that there isn't enough farm land to fo around and so many work in "regular jobs"... B~ |
|
19 Aug 08 - 01:05 PM (#2417842) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger "seems that man really doesn't buckle down to solve problems until they reach crisis level..." Boy, you got that right! |
|
19 Aug 08 - 01:27 PM (#2417858) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Some people share some don't. |
|
19 Aug 08 - 02:06 PM (#2417899) Subject: RE: BS: = Abortion From: Barry Finn Mexico is the problem Here in New England we don't have a Mexican problem, it's Polish & Irish but they look alot like the rest of US so why is this a Southern Border problem, bacuse it can be showcased, it's visual, it make some of US think that their 1st a problem & 2nd that the problem's being taken care of. Hre in the North East in the Construction Industry we get many companies that have both legal & illegal immigrant on & off the books in such a way that they change per job. The employers pay no taxes on the, no workers comp, no SS, they get a daily wage rather than by hr so there's no extra for overtime or holidays, there's no medical coverage, there no unemployment benifts, there's nothing but straight pay. Now when that company bids for a contract against an honest employer whose labor costs will win out? But is that the fault of the immigrant or the falt of an employer & a faulty system. Don't blame the poor immigrant for trying to make better or survive, they are as much the victum as we who are the working class are. THEY ARE US when it comes to being taken advantage of, we are also the victums of our own Coporate Society/Government & they are needed as much as we are, we balance each other for the good of the profit, we exist in the same vacum & could probably not exist with out each other. It has always been when a new set of immigrants comes into a society that they get put to work in the thankless jobs that others don't want. Why do they call them "sandhogs" or "ditchdiggers" or "fruitflies" or whatever, cause we put them to work at the bottom, pay them the less, treat them like shit. BUt we need them just as much as they need US. It's not fair to anyone, not them, not US, not our society, not our Government, not to those who could use the jobs they take but won't work as slaves, not the welfare system, not the health care system & not the educational system but as long as a profit is being made off their backs it will continue & those in power may give alot of mouth to it & build fences & such but they will see that it goes on. Why shut out the immigrant, unless you are of the First Natios you are the reciepiant of an immigrant ascestory. They do not come here only for themselves, they come here for teir children & their children as did yours. If you don't like it try going to the root of the problem, it's not about immigrants, it's about profit, it's not about hospitals closings, it's not about jobs (we export those now anyway), it's not about our economy. It's about how the laws of this land are geared to make sure the working class, & that's you, me, & the legal & illegal immigrants support the power & wealth of the all mighty. The American Dream of working to get ahead is flawed & gone by the boards, it is no longer the case. It is those that can & do twist the laws that are made in their favor that become the ones who exploit the rest of US to a point where we blame each other for our lot in live or our not being at the top of the heap. So back to Contraception. The best way to prevent conception is through education, all aspects of the situation. Not we'll only support abstinence education as this governmet does nationally & internationally. The distrubition of condoms hear & abroad is not a preventive measurethe US supports, unreasonable & unbelivable. The funding for education based of beliefs is also "UN & UN" (God & government again) . It should mater what ones beliefs are, when one is fully educated & informed they have the whereall to make ther own dississions about their own bodies & their own futures. Deny them thse basics & you deny them their freedom of choice, which is what this debate is all about. A person's freedom of choice is what's at stake here, this is what Roe vs Wade is all about. This is an attempt to erode, further the human choice of what one can & can't do with their own bodies (& minds, as far as I'm concerned). Call a life starting where ever you want but don't tell me where you think it starts for me untill you have undebatable back up to prove your position & not a minute before that. Don't tell me what your God or your religion or your Governement thinks or says because this is MY personnal issue not theirs, when they live my life then they can have a say in it. I follow society laws & rules but society needs to let me live my life with the freedoms that's granted & promised me by the highest laws of the land. The hows & whys of the personnal sex lives & practices are not found anywhere in any law books as long as it pertains to consenting adults, it needs to stay that way. Contraception & Abortion = not your business when it doesn't concern you personnally!!!!! Barry |
|
19 Aug 08 - 03:38 PM (#2417970) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: katlaughing Barry, I take back what I said about men not many having any say as it is women's bodies. YOU get it and have put it very well. Thank you, my friend. |
|
19 Aug 08 - 04:03 PM (#2417983) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger "Contraception & Abortion = not your business when it doesn't concern you personnally!!!!!" Okay. But it does concern you personally when your schools are crowded, your hospitals are closing, you have to pay for more and more infrastructure to accommodate people who should not be here... And, like Barry says above, many of these people pay no taxes at all, unless they live in a state with sales taxes. And he's basically right, that it isn't the immigrant's fault, which is why the board of directors of Tyson Foods should be in jail along with a bunch of other employers. But anything they are willing to do at this point to curtail the invasion is fine with me. |
|
19 Aug 08 - 05:14 PM (#2418054) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly "Call a life starting where ever you want but don't tell me where you think it starts for me untill you have undebatable back up to prove your position & not a minute before that." Again, you are placing the burden of proof on the wrong party. The side that wants to extinguish the life should be the one with the burden of proof that it is not a human before they are allowed to kill it. All the rest of our legal system works this way. You should be the one with the "undebatable back up" if you wish to extinguish the life. If you think that more contraception should be available, fine. Fight THAT battle. But don't tell me you should then have the right to extinguish life until such time as you prove your case against the unborn. |
|
19 Aug 08 - 06:08 PM (#2418086) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Barry Finn You prove to me that it's a life, other wise stay out of mine!! I care not a twit what you believe or who you believe, when it's your body do as you will, when it's not stay far away! Barry |
|
19 Aug 08 - 06:09 PM (#2418088) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Richard Bridge Personally, I swat mosquitos. |
|
19 Aug 08 - 06:14 PM (#2418094) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Barry Finn I'll take that 200 too Barry |
|
19 Aug 08 - 06:15 PM (#2418095) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly But I got 201. It's the new 200. |
|
19 Aug 08 - 06:19 PM (#2418098) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly "...when it's your body do as you will, when it's not stay far away!" Which body, the baby's or yours? And if I'm disqualified from making an ethical judgement based on my gender, so are you -- no matter which side of the issue you come down on. If you're demanding that standard, then your comments should be just as ignored as you demand mine be. |
|
19 Aug 08 - 07:29 PM (#2418153) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Ebbie To me, the issue comes down to When is the baby-to-be a thinking and viable human creature? Until then it is not human, only a human-in-waiting. As far as calling a 10-cell conglomeration human, don't be ridiculous. Whether a sperm or egg is circumvented from meeting or, further, where the uterine wall is made unreceptive and enabled to cast off an enterprising endeavor, that blob, or less, is not human. The 'mother ship', so to speak, has every right to make the decision. My opinion, of course. I have friends who are concerned about the fact that abortion is nullifying a potential child that was perhaps meant to be born. My answer would be - would have to be - that Nature herself casts off many, many such efforts. If a child is meant to be born, he or she will try it again and again. |
|
19 Aug 08 - 07:36 PM (#2418161) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack The Sailor The definition man who doesn't believe in dictionaries being used on the Mudcat deciding for all that abortion is "extinguishing a life." A person can say things like that when his principle source of data is his own ass. |
|
19 Aug 08 - 07:46 PM (#2418175) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly "To me, the issue comes down to When is the baby-to-be a thinking and viable human creature?" What's the earliest prematurely born child you know? (I know three who were born at six months -- one of those just a little bit less than six. All three healthy, normally developed children now. One 15 years old, the youngest of the three 3 years old) |
|
19 Aug 08 - 07:47 PM (#2418177) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger I think we've entered into a no-win discussion! |
|
19 Aug 08 - 07:52 PM (#2418185) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Kent Davis Just some little reminders to those who have commented without reading the thread: 1. No one at all says that contraception = abortion, not President Bush, not the Administration, not the Roman Catholic church, not the Mormons, not the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy, no one. As was pointed out in the 9th post, the issue is whether birth control products that work at least partly as anti-implantation technologies should be called "contraceptives". This distinction is important to women who want to control conception but do not want to cause the demise of a conceptus. 2. Contrary to the implication of Bobert's post of 9:59, the one who hijacked this thread with his anti-immigration rants was Riginslinger, one of the most LEFTwing members of this forum. Kent |
|
19 Aug 08 - 08:13 PM (#2418205) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack The Sailor On the contrary Kent. The thread is about the Bush administration's attempt to change the commonly accepted and legal definitions of abortion to include what is now considered by those without sneaky agendas as various types of contraceptives. Below is the thread that started the post. In the ninth thread Kent did point out that he didn't consider certain "anti-implantation technologies" to be contraception. But he did not take into account that in most people's eyes and in the eyes of the law, that they are The issue is whether some fanatical Bush appointee should be allowed to change these definitions by stealth and fiat or whether there should be a public debate. The issue is whether hypocrites who will blather until the cows come home about "activist judges" should get away with end runs around the constitution as activist administrators. >>>Subject: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: michaelr Date: 13 Aug 08 - 10:45 PM Just got this from MoveOn.org - unbelievable: Dear MoveOn member, Can you imagine living in a place where birth control is considered an "abortion" and health insurers won't cover it? Where even rape victims are denied emergency contraception?<<< |
|
19 Aug 08 - 08:14 PM (#2418206) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Kent Davis By the way, I won't blame the left for Riginslinger's rants if you won't blame the right for Guest from Sanity's rants. Sometimes I wonder if those two are not agents provocateur. Kent |
|
19 Aug 08 - 08:18 PM (#2418212) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Kent Davis Jack, I have no sneaky agenda. I do not consider those agents "contraceptives" because they prevent implantation. Implantation is not conception. Do you consider it "sneaky" to call something by its proper name? Kent |
|
19 Aug 08 - 08:41 PM (#2418228) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack The Sailor Kent, The problem with your argument is that the definitions of abortion that you introduced in this thread were new to me, and I am sure, unheard of by most non-fanatically anti-birthcontrol Americans. If you are for what the administration is doing you are supporting a sneaky agenda. Your "implantation" definition of abortion has no moral or practical value. IUD's etc are birth control. Even you say that the methods sometimes work as contraceptives. So they are not abortions, they are only potential abortions. Without arguments like yours a mother of faith could use the device or pill and rely on God and her prayers to have it work as a contraceptive. Even so, fertilized eggs are not babies. John Hardly saying something is so does not make it so. Does a fertilized egg have human rights? The question alone mocks the concept of human rights. I am sure that you have opinions different than mine on the points I have just made. That's where the debate lies. If you want to change the legal and commonly used definitions. Start an information campaign. Try to change the law. Don't have some political hack try to change the law behind closed doors.. |
|
19 Aug 08 - 08:42 PM (#2418230) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack The Sailor Should be .... Try to change the law in Congress. |
|
19 Aug 08 - 09:05 PM (#2418243) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Peace Keriste. You people just talkin' to hear yourselves? "Where even rape victims are denied emergency contraception?" WTF does THAT mean. I keep thinking it's a bit late at that point, ain't it? |
|
19 Aug 08 - 09:22 PM (#2418251) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger Yeah, I was thinking the same thing, Peace. I kind of lost the thread of the thing at that point. |
|
19 Aug 08 - 09:49 PM (#2418285) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Jeri Kent, implantation IS conception. From Merriam-Webster: 1 a (1): the process of becoming pregnant involving fertilization or implantation or both From MedicineNet.com: Conception: 1. The union of the sperm and the ovum. Synonymous with fertilization. 2. The onset of pregnancy, marked by implantation of the blastocyst into the endometrium. A blastocyst has to be implanted to become a fetus, which is "The unborn offspring from the end of the 8th week after conception (when the major structures have formed) until birth. Up until the eighth week, the developing offspring is called an embryo.". Personally, I think anyone who believes preventing implantation = abortion is nuts, but by the definitions above, preventing implantation IS contraception and 'emergency contraception' would mean RU-486. I don't think they're talking about retro-active IUDs. |
|
19 Aug 08 - 10:26 PM (#2418305) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Ebbie Peace and Rig, I think the term was misused but is actually referring to the 'morning after' pill. |
|
19 Aug 08 - 10:35 PM (#2418308) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Peace Thanks, Jeri. |
|
19 Aug 08 - 10:45 PM (#2418317) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Peace Thanks, Ebbie. |
|
19 Aug 08 - 11:08 PM (#2418330) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Peace, Moveon is saying that there is a Bush administration scheme to make the morning after pill and several other birth control devices more difficult to obtain by simply calling them abortion. Kent apparently thinks that is reasonable because he doesn't think that those devices keep sperm from fertilizing eggs. Apparently he believes every form of birth control method that does not separate sperm and eggs is abortion. I am saying that it is not abortion by law until the law says it is. It is a silly argument. But it does affect millions of women and health care workers. that is what this country has come to. Forget being reasonable. Fight over semantics, cause that's what lawyers get paid for. Its Skins against Shirts, shirts against skins forget common sense as long as my team wins! |
|
19 Aug 08 - 11:12 PM (#2418333) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: katlaughing Thanks, Jeri! BTW, there is an interesting editorial at National Catholic Reporter on the issue of abortion and a shift in the platform of the Democratic Party. Here's part of what the Wall Street Journal published about this whole thing: he Bush Administration has ignited a furor with a proposed definition of pregnancy that has the effect of classifying some of the most widely used methods of contraception as abortion. A draft regulation, still being revised and debated, treats most birth-control pills and intrauterine devices as abortion because they can work by preventing fertilized eggs from implanting in the uterus. The regulation considers that destroying "the life of a human being." Many medical groups disagree. They hold that pregnancy isn't established until several days after conception, when the fertilized egg has grown to a cluster of several dozen cells and burrowed into the uterine wall. Anything that disrupts that process, in their view, is contraception. The draft regulation, circulating within the Department of Health and Human Services, would have no immediate effect on the legality of the pill or the IUD if implemented because abortion is legal. But opponents fear it would undercut dozens of state laws designed to promote easy access to these methods of birth control, used by more than 12 million women a year. There is a long paper about the issue HERE by pro-life ob-gyns which includes the following: An extensive review of pertinent scientific writings indicates that there is no credible evidence to validate a mechanism of pre-implantation abortion as a part of the action of hormone contraceptives. On the contrary, the existing evidence indicates that "on pill" conceptions are handled by the reproductive system with the same results seen with "off pill" conceptions, with the exception of increased ectopic rates seen with POPs and Norplant. and: In order to classify COCs (combined oral contraceptives) as an abortifacient, several things must exist: 1) Conceptions must occur. 2) The abortive effect must be present with proper use as prescribed. 3) Loss of these conceptions must exceed the base-line loss for populations not using this substance, or be shown to occur due solely to the medication itself, and not other known factors. 4) The abortive effect should be consistent and reproducible by multiple independent observers. There are no studies that we are aware of regarding combined oral contraceptives or Depoprovera that demonstrate numbers 2,3, or 4. (Increased ectopic pregnancies seen with progestin only pills (POPs) and Norplant will be discussed in the appropriate section below.) It is a very interesting paper. |
|
20 Aug 08 - 02:32 AM (#2418385) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor I have been talking with Carol about this. Perhaps there is a misunderstanding. Kent. In your first post you accused someone of being misleading about the Bush Administration equating contraception and abortion. The Moveon ad says that The Bush Administration is equating "Birth control" and "Emergency contraception" with abortion. Michaelr, perhaps equates Contraception with birth control , hence the title. I am willing to bet that he, like me, before reading this thread, thought that contraception and birth control, meant the same thing. Thank you Katlaughing for your last post. It cleared up that confusion for me quite nicely. I believe Kent Davis, that you were mistaken to say that Michaelr's title on this thread was misleading. Indeed it was mistaken. No one did any more than imply that it was the Bush Administration was equating contraception and abortion. So it seems that an accidental straw man was created. I apologize for not knowing the clinical definitions of Birth control vs contraception before I spoke up. It would have saved us some time if I had recognized the misunderstanding at post ten rather than post two hundred and twenty something. |
|
20 Aug 08 - 04:20 AM (#2418416) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Joe Offer In most situations, "contraception" and "birth control" do have the same meaning. I don't think Michaelr's thread title was misleading - in two words, he summed up exactly what was in the MoveOn statement. But MoveOn exaggerated the situation, and played loose with the facts to put more "spin" on the issue. I think this goes to show you that MoveOn is simply a propaganda organization, not a reliable source of information. It does appear that the Bush Administration is up to dirty tricks in the area of birth control, but the MoveOn statement exaggerates things to the point where MoveOn is no longer a credible source. Too bad. -Joe- |
|
20 Aug 08 - 04:42 AM (#2418423) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Joe, Moveon drives me crazy, I agree with you. They are way too shrill and they tend to exaggerate. It seems their only function is to whip people up enough to pay for their ads. Kent You were right and I was wrong. Moveon did mislead. They did say. I don't know why i did not notice this before I was preparing a reply for Joe. (tell him)"Contraception is NOT abortion." I gave michaelr credit for making and honest mistake. But Moveon. Is asking for money and asking people to put their credibility on the line. Its not excusable. Its sad that important issues like this don't get brought up and discussed in the open rather than be seized on by the fanatical fringes like Moveon and the Bush administration. ;-) |
|
20 Aug 08 - 07:35 AM (#2418491) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger "MoveOn statement exaggerates things to the point where MoveOn is no longer a credible source." Which is how we got our current Democratic nominee. |
|
20 Aug 08 - 08:00 AM (#2418516) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor We got our current Democratic nominee because he ran a better campaign than the Clintons. Moveon had little to do with it. He is eating Moveon's lunch, taking away their donation base. If you Don't like Moveon Obama is good news. |
|
20 Aug 08 - 10:19 AM (#2418628) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger MoveOn was the bankroll that allowed him to outspend his opponents. We keep hearing that he ran a better campaign, but the truth of the matter is, Hillary kept running out of money. |
|
20 Aug 08 - 10:22 AM (#2418632) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor His website bankrolled him. Moveon donors gave to him instead of them. |
|
20 Aug 08 - 10:42 AM (#2418650) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: katlaughing MoveOn members voted on which one they wanted to throw their support behind...Obama won that vote and deserves/d all of it he can get. |
|
20 Aug 08 - 11:32 AM (#2418682) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger Which is why McCain is ahead in the polls now. |
|
20 Aug 08 - 11:58 AM (#2418693) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Peace In this instance, Move On makes me think of PETA. |
|
20 Aug 08 - 01:25 PM (#2418736) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: PoppaGator When someone mentioned Italy much earlier, I did not know it was leading to a discussion of the number of foreigners locked up in Italian jails. My first thought was of an entirely different consideration, something I read about in the New York Times Magazine a couple of weeks ago. Italy has the lowest birth rate among all the world's nations; Europe as a whole is not reproducing its current native population, and Italy is the most extreme example. I don't know where to begin discussing the many ways this pertains to the subject at hand, but I'll simply ask you to consider it as food for thought. The best-educated and most privileged demographic groups on the planet are fading away into self-selected extinction, employing various means including contrception, abortion, and techniques that might be considered one or the other. Meanwhile, the wretched of the earth are multiplying like there's no tomorrow. There is work that needs to be done everywhere in the developed world, some of it poorly paid and requiring little or no training. What else could possibly be expected except the general trend of migration that seems to scare the shit out of our most xenophobic fellow citizens? |
|
20 Aug 08 - 01:26 PM (#2418739) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Amos A wonderful film called Idiocracy explores that very issue, Poppa. If you haven't seen it, you'll get a chuckle out of renting it. A |
|
20 Aug 08 - 02:22 PM (#2418783) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly "The best-educated and most privileged demographic groups on the planet are fading away into self-selected extinction, employing various means including contrception, abortion, and techniques that might be considered one or the other. Meanwhile, the wretched of the earth are multiplying like there's no tomorrow. There is work that needs to be done everywhere in the developed world, some of it poorly paid and requiring little or no training." There've been any number of articles I've read that relate to this. One about the severe imbalance that China has created in its population as it billion only sons reach reproducing (and warring) age themselves and find that the generation of their parents left them with no females with which to mate. Another talked about the political imbalance as the erudite liberal college-educated masses of Democrat voters have been giving way in numbers to the homeschooled conservative Republican voters. There's always been at least a small but signicant number of "pro-choice" who can't bring themselves to say it aloud, but whisper to each other, "pst....we NEED to promote abortion -- especially in the third world and poor areas of our own country -- or else we'll be overrun by the wrong element". It was at the founding of the movement with Margaret Sanger hoping to contol "colored" populations who weren't sufficiently evolved, and it continues insidiously today. |
|
20 Aug 08 - 02:34 PM (#2418796) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: katlaughing John, that is a bunch of crap. Pro-choice, read my lips, FIRST and Foremost says "we NEED to promote education and easily accessible contraception." Do that and guess what, less and less of a need for abortions. |
|
20 Aug 08 - 02:45 PM (#2418816) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly Just to be clear, your post isn't arguing against the points in my post. |
|
20 Aug 08 - 03:25 PM (#2418855) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger "The best-educated and most privileged demographic groups on the planet are fading away into self-selected extinction..." That was the case up until the last 2 or 3 years. Since that time, the Euro-centric populations have stepped on the reproductive gas. Probably because they felt they were being overrun by third world immigrants. |
|
20 Aug 08 - 04:33 PM (#2418901) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: PoppaGator Rig, I'd like to believe white folks have come to their senses and gotten back to making babies instead of worryong only about making money, but I'd hate to believe that any individuals were consciously producing offspring only to avoid "being overrun" by the offspring of other other folks whom they hate and fear. Kat, you're betraying an overly-defensive attitude in your post of 2:34 pm; John was only saying that "there's always been at least a small but significant number" hoping that ethnic groups other than their own would turn to abortion is large numbers. His historical reference is unassailable, and we all know that "at least a small but significant number" of bigots continue to exist today. Amos, I've seen Idiocracy, and liked the basic premise when I first heard about the film,, even before I saw it. But the film itself disappointed me; I always hope for more sophisticated humor than I usually get. If I may digress a bit, there's one aspect of the women's lib movement that has always bothered me, especially when I read commentators who emphasize the women's movement's roots in the overall peace-and-freedom movement of the 1960s. One aspect of the effort to achieve economic equality seems to me to have involved young women stepping into positions in the corporate machine just as large numbers of hopefully-enlightened young men were rejecting them out of hand. I don't mean to condemn every instance of economic striving, or to "blame" one gender to the complete exclusion of the other for all that's wrong with the world, but the emphasis on "career" among educated upper-middle-class youth strikes me as less than wholesome, and the fact that this phenomenon is not limited to the poor dumb male of the species is especially worrisome. And isn't it convenient for the multinationals, and for all the smaller businesses who have to supply them and/or complete with them, that contemporary society accepts the precept that both parents in a family be working for a paycheck? They only have to pay each of their employees half the amount necessary to support a family, which is markedly different from the situation for earlier generations. I'm all for equal-pay-for-equal-work, and I would have been glad to have spent a few years as house-husband and stay-at-home dad, taking turns with my wife as participants in the workforce. I don't want to be misunderstood as sexist, but I think that it's a terrible development that young people have come to equate "success" with such rigid conformity and blind obedience to corporate values, at the expense of domesticity. And it's especailly threatening to our continued existence as a civilization when so many young women feel compelled to dedicate their lives to Mammon in preference to motherhood. |
|
20 Aug 08 - 09:53 PM (#2419135) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger "Rig, I'd like to believe white folks have come to their senses and gotten back to making babies instead of worryong only about making money, but I'd hate to believe that any individuals were consciously producing offspring only to avoid "being overrun" by the offspring of other other folks whom they hate and fear." I don't think it has much of anything to do with hate and fear, Pappa G. I think it has more to do with industrialized populations realizing that they needed to control population growth if they expected any kind of quality of life for their children and grandchildren. But when they finally realized that their collective governments were not going to do anything about illegal immigration, and they saw the intruders sucking up the majority of all government services, while all they were allowed to do was pay, they simply threw up their hands and decided, "If you can't beat them, join them." And that, sadly, is where we are today. |
|
20 Aug 08 - 10:36 PM (#2419152) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Kent Davis Thanks, Jack, and I believe you are right; the title of this thread was not purposely misleading, only mistaken. Several have pointed out that many people see no significant difference between preventing fertilization and preventing implantation. I know. Many of my patients have told me that they see no ethical difference. The point I am trying to make is that some people DO see an ethical difference and the current terminology is misleading on an issue important to them. Suppose you are ethically opposed to trapping animals for furs. Suppose I am not. Suppose I sell you a coat trimmed with what I vaguely refer to as "faux". Suppose you later find out that the coat is actually trimmed with the fur of trapped muskrats. Wouldn't you be angry? Kent |
|
20 Aug 08 - 10:39 PM (#2419154) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Nah, I can tell fox from Muskrat. But why the strange spelling? |
|
20 Aug 08 - 11:02 PM (#2419161) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: katlaughing Poppa, if I seem "overly defensive" it is because the fight has been long and hard and I've had it, once again, with being generalised, mis-characterised, marginalised, and stereotyped.:-) (I was trying to work that into a Woody-patter, but Woody I ain't!) |
|
21 Aug 08 - 12:59 AM (#2419202) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Barry Finn But why the strange spelling? Very funny Jack, this thread could use a bit more hummers. It could be part of the soullotion. Barry |
|
21 Aug 08 - 05:29 PM (#2419745) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: PoppaGator It always amazes me that people can be persuaded that their woes, economic and otherwise, can and should be blamed upon those who are even worse off than themselves. It's called "scapegoating." Hitler persuaded the German people to blame The Jews for all their problems. The fat cats in control of the one-party American South were able for decades upon decades to convince the poor exploited white population to take out all their frustrations upon the even-poorer and even-more-exploited blacks. So now it's the hardworking, uninsured, overworked and underpaid Spanish-speaking brown folks who are the cause of all our woes. Don't dare harbor a negative thought about the millionaires working so hard to land cost-plus government contracts, maintain our entire society's dependence upon the finite supply of fossil fuels that they control, and discourage the emergence of renewable-energy technologies that could eventually free everyone from dependence upon their oligarchy! It's those damn Messicans who are to blame for everything! |
|
21 Aug 08 - 05:48 PM (#2419757) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger Funny, I don't know anybody who feels that way! |
|
22 Aug 08 - 07:39 AM (#2419986) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Kent Davis Jack, Watt due ewe mean? Dew ewe thank eye don't naux howe two spell? That's a laux blaux. Eye cant take it naux maux. Ive got too gaux. Kent |
|
22 Aug 08 - 11:57 AM (#2420126) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: katlaughing Well said, Poppa. |
|
22 Aug 08 - 12:05 PM (#2420134) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: John Hardly "So now it's the hardworking, uninsured, overworked and underpaid Spanish-speaking brown folks who are the cause of all our woes. Don't dare harbor a negative thought about the millionaires working so hard to land cost-plus government contracts, maintain our entire society's dependence upon the finite supply of fossil fuels that they control, and discourage the emergence of renewable-energy technologies that could eventually free everyone from dependence upon their oligarchy! It's those damn Messicans who are to blame for everything!" Sorry, but at least as far as I'm concerned, you've characterized the situation 180 degrees wrong. Much of the blame goes to those "millionaires" who are exploiting Mexico's worse (than the US's) economic situation to make it even harder on the "hardworking, uninsured, overworked and underpaid" labor force that is legally part of our country. If there's a "scapegoat" then, it is your "millionaire". At least, that, and the US government's accomodation to them, is where the blame for the situation lies. |
|
22 Aug 08 - 12:39 PM (#2420157) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: pdq Nobody seems willing to go back a little farther and blame the two-tier society in Mexico. Wealthy landowners, business leaders and most poloticians are Sppanish decent The working class folks are native or Mexican Indian decent. The elite do not do manuel labor and the "peons" do not move up in society. This is actually the European model for olden times. The United States, despite the hysterical claims by Lefties, does allow anyone and everyone to get and education and to attempt to move upwards in society (often meaning make money). That is why most Mexicans come here. The questions are about illegal immigration and whether or not it will be controlled. People who do not want to discuss the issue honestly will intentionally mix the illegal v legal immigration issues. This is an attempt to destroy meaningful discourse. |
|
22 Aug 08 - 01:03 PM (#2420171) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: PoppaGator Well, John, we certainly do agree on one thing: one of the many ways in which the rich manage to keep getting richer and richer these days is the exploitation of migrant labor. And I certainly agree with you, also, that natural-born Americans and legal immigrants, indeed all working people, suffer from the situation almost as much as the illegals. However, I don't agree with your classifying the agribusiness fatcats as "scapegoats," because my understanding of that word's definition includes the proviso that the scapegoat is falsely or unfairly blamed for various troubles. The employers of illegals, to different extents, can very fairly be accused of guilt. Indeed, in many cases, they're the leading scapegoaters. The biggest and most powerful among them, through their lobbists and "think-tank" front organizations, are the leading cheerleaders and sponsors of the media-blitz offense against their most wretched employees, deflecting attention from themselves while shifting the blame to those very folks upon whose backs they are building their fortunes. The trickiest aspect of this whole scenario is that, to a cerain extent, we all benefit economically from black-market/gray-market labor. If you think food prices are high now, just imagine how much higher they'd be if agricultural employers were paying FICA taxes (social security) for all their workers, let alone any of the other benefits that are generally associated with legitimate employment. A large share of the long, hard, house-by-house rebuilding of New Orleans has been and continues to be performed by young Hispanic men. Much of this effort is being paid for by very hard-pressed homeowners and small businesspersons. Regardless of whether their resources include a few taxpayer-paid grant dollars, these individuals determine where their money is spent, and desperately need to squeeze every penny if they hope to bring their rebuilding projects to completion. Even though things might be different in an ideal world, cheap off-the-books labors is a major factor in making anything happen around here. It's almost impossible NOT to be complicit to some extent. My sons and I did an awful lot of work for ourselves, all day every day for almost the entire calendar year of 2006, and never once drove to the shape-up in front of Lowe's to hire any Latino workers. However, I have to admit that, when my roofer and my insurance adjuster colluded to replace my aluminum roof for half-again as high a price as I paid for it just two years earlier (but at no out-of-pocket expense to me), I came home one afternoon to find at least a dozen Hondurans and Mexicans swarming all over our house, tearing off the damaged aluminum faux-shingle panels so fast and furiously that I couldn't get to my door without dodging the falling debris. It took a mere day and a half to finish the job; I have no idea how much of my insurance money went to each worker, but I'm sure none of them pocketed even half as much as the adjuster who signed off on the deal or the roofing contractor who persuaded him to do so. (I thought of writing a blues, "Sheet metal fallin' down like rain," but never did come up with a second line or any more verses.) |
|
22 Aug 08 - 07:47 PM (#2420391) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Barry Finn "My roof's coming off And nails my pain" |
|
22 Aug 08 - 09:34 PM (#2420445) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger "It took a mere day and a half to finish the job; I have no idea how much of my insurance money went to each worker, but I'm sure none of them pocketed even half as much as the adjuster who signed off on the deal or the roofing contractor who persuaded him to do so." I had a weird cleanup job in California a few years back, so I hired this Mexican guy (American citizen with Spanish surname who identified himself as being Mexican) to do it on a time & material basis. The first day I came out, there were something like 15 or 16 people cleaning up the site, some of them were women, and some of them looked to young to work. I asked the guy about the youngsters, and he said he would document everything. The second day, there were about the same number of people, but they weren't all the same people. He finished on the third day, and I breathed a sigh of relief. When he presented me with his bill, which was very reasonable for the amount of work the folks had done, he'd only charged me for 5 laborers and a foreman. I knew there were something like 3 times that many people on the job, and I suspected most of them were illegal. I think he hired these guys and paid them about what an American worker would make, and then each one of them hire two other people--wives and children, maybe--and then the money was spilt between them or not. I didn't feel comfortable with what had gone on, and didn't get into any more contracts like that--what if someone would have gotten hurt or something--but I suspect this goes on all over California. I don't know about other places. |
|
23 Aug 08 - 12:46 AM (#2420513) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Barry Finn "what if someone would have gotten hurt" That's why you ask for a license, a cert of insurance, corporate papers otherwise if they get hurt you may as well hand over the keys to your house. They also take the risk, that if they get hurt they aren't covered by workers comp. It's a employers job when hiring an employee to photo copy all documents that prove they're hiring someone why legal. As a home owner you do as you will but buyer beware. But does this have anything to do with Contraception=Abortion???? We are pretty far from being on topic. PoppaGator, as far as what happened to you folks in NO, Femma & Bush have failed you so badly. You & those folks trying to earn a buck rebuilding are again victums, more like rats trying to refurbish their sinking vessel with the help of a few cats who also don't want to go down with the ship but don't want to abandon or jump if there's any other way possible. Someday, some heads should/will roll for what happened there. Barry |
|
23 Aug 08 - 09:00 AM (#2420621) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Riginslinger "PoppaGator, as far as what happened to you folks in NO, Femma & Bush have failed you so badly. You & those folks trying to earn a buck rebuilding are again victums, more like rats trying to refurbish their sinking vessel with the help of a few cats who also don't want to go down with the ship but don't want to abandon or jump if there's any other way possible. Someday, some heads should/will roll for what happened there." And what does that have to do with Contraception = Abortion |
|
17 Nov 08 - 04:34 AM (#2495655) Subject: RE: BS: Contraception = Abortion From: Genie Well, the "abortion" issue threads part 1 and part 2 seem to have been closed, and since that self-same broad, tangled issue seems to be reappearing in the thread about the parish priest who's denying communion to those who voted for Obama, I thought maybe we should refresh this 'oldie but goodie' -- for the sake of those optimistic, idealistic, or just plain masochistic enough to want to keep this thorny issue alive and active. Genie |