Ranting: ungrateful "pro choicers"

[Abbey Normal]

By providing fact-based sex education courses in junior-high and high school and mandatory courses in critical thinking skills starting in elementary school. I doubt very seriously that this will happen though. God forbid that America should have a well educated population capable of understanding the consequences of their actions.

Most of what kids hear in school from adults goes in one ear (if you're lucky) and out the other, even when things are calm and they can think somewhat rationally. Do you honestly think that a school lecture will matter when teenage hormones are raging? Yeah, sure it will...
Add to that the influence of scummy tv shows and commercials, raunchy music and games, and libs' constant devaluation of morals and religion, and you have a potent mix heading inevitably to the abortion clinic or the maternity ward.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Well considering you want students to somehow think that condoms will protect them from any consequences of sex, you are one to talk about an educated population.

Give them the information they need to make informed, intelligent choices. And they won't think "...condoms will protect them from any consequences of sex...". That's a straw man you've set up there, and I'm happy to knock it down for you. Dubbyuh's "abstinence only" program sure ain't working.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Most of what kids hear in school from adults goes in one ear (if you're lucky) and out the other, even when things are calm and they can think somehwat rationally. Do you honestly think that a school lecture will matter when teenage hormones are raging? Yeah, sure it will...
Add to that the influence of scummy tv shows and commercials, raunchy music and games, and libs' constant devaluation of morals and religion, and you have a potent mix heading inevitably to the abortion clinic or the maternity ward.

The entertainment industry only produces what sells. They wouldn't produce it otherwise...supply and demand...capitalism. As for liberals devaluing morals, why we have those sterling conservative paragons of moral virtue like Jimmy Swaggart, who was caught tossing off in a sleazy hotel room in front of a trull and her under-age daughter. There is Newt Gingrich who sought, and got, the dissolution of his marriage while his wife lay dying in a hospital so he could marry some young tart. And, more recently, we have Tom DeLay, Jack Abramoff, Karl Rove, and the list goes on.

No lecture can replace the values inculcated in the home, but when there are no parents at home to instill these values, where else will our children learn them. Provide a solid curriculum in critical thinking skills from 5th or 6th grade forward, fact based sex-ed programs from the same levels, and you have a real program for reducing the number of teen pregnancies, unplanned pregnancies and abortions.

But you really don't want that, do you? You'd rather let the same old shit drag on while you beat your breast in moral outrage as the simple-minded and draconinan measures you advocate fail, or worse, are ignored.

 

[Gabriella84]

Bullypulpit, you could sway more opinions here if you didn't present arguments laced with facts. The Bush Information Bureau avoids facts when they conflict with their ideology.

 

[MissileMan]

I guess I'll decide today to eliminate someone who is an inconvenience in my life. Perhaps the neighbor who plays vile and vulgar rap music until 4:00 AM every night; or perhaps the lady who parks in my favorite spot at the supermarket; or the guy who keeps letting his dog crap on my yard; and so on and so on. Wouldn't that be the essense of choice also? I mean, after all, they are inconveniencing my life.

Wow, this is a compelling argument.

Comparing the legal abortion of a group of cells with the potential to become a human being with the illegal murder of a neighbor or store customer or the guy down the street who doesn't use a pooper-scooper.

 

[dilloduck]

The entertainment industry only produces what sells. They wouldn't produce it otherwise...supply and demand...capitalism. As for liberals devaluing morals, why we have those sterling conservative paragons of moral virtue like Jimmy Swaggart, who was caught tossing off in a sleazy hotel room in front of a trull and her under-age daughter. There is Newt Gingrich who sought, and got, the dissolution of his marriage while his wife lay dying in a hospital so he could marry some young tart. And, more recently, we have Tom DeLay, Jack Abramoff, Karl Rove, and the list goes on.

No lecture can replace the values inculcated in the home, but when there are no parents at home to instill these values, where else will our children learn them. Provide a solid curriculum in critical thinking skills from 5th or 6th grade forward, fact based sex-ed programs from the same levels, and you have a real program for reducing the number of teen pregnancies, unplanned pregnancies and abortions.

But you really don't want that, do you? You'd rather let the same old shit drag on while you beat your breast in moral outrage as the simple-minded and draconinan measures you advocate fail, or worse, are ignored.

criticize those that criticize those that criticize--you realize this never ends, bully? We're ALL hypocritcal to a certain extent--it's simply a matter of degree---then we can argue who is the WORST hypocrite. :teeth:

 

[Avatar4321]

Give them the information they need to make informed, intelligent choices. And they won't think "...condoms will protect them from any consequences of sex...". That's a straw man you've set up there, and I'm happy to knock it down for you. Dubbyuh's "abstinence only" program sure ain't working.

"The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting, it has been found difficult and left untried."

It's amazing how you refuse to actually try something before declaring it unsuccessful.

As for the so called straw man. Knock it down big boy. The intellectually honest people in the world would be able to tell you the only way to 100% avoid the consequences of sex is to save it for marriage. Do you have the integrity to admit that?

 

[Avatar4321]

Wow, this is a compelling argument.

Comparing the legal abortion of a group of cells with the potential to become a human being with the illegal murder of a neighbor or store customer or the guy down the street who doesn't use a pooper-scooper.

And somehow the fact that a court calls one legal and the other illegal destroys the analogy? Both actions take human life. The fact that you fail to comprehend that is astonishing.

 

[KarlMarx]

Only on USMB would I actually side with an attorney.... stranger things have happened.....

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Amendment XIV Section 1 --- this is what started the whole Roe vs. Wade argument.

Griswold vs Connecticut (1965) established that a "right to privacy" exists based on .... get this..... "emanations of penumbras" of rights stated in the 14th amendment together with the First, Third, Fourth, and Ninth Amendments, created a new constitutional right, the right to privacy in marital relations. (an emanation is something that is radiated, a penumbra is the partial shadow caused during an eclipse)... So, because there is a radiating partial shadow which takes place during an eclipse caused by the most indirect path imaginable through a jerry rigged crazy quilt of constitutional amendments, we now have the right to privacy (other cases expanded the right to privacy from marital relationships, to unmarried relationships and eventually to gays as in Lawrence vs Texas)

And because we have this right to privacy, we now have abortion....

(Stops to catch his breath) ---- now wasn't that simple and straightforward? Some idiot judges manufacture a right out of the Constitution using the most indirect and tortuous route possible (some would use the term "pulled it out of their ass").

Now, if I weren't an attorney (and I'm not), I'd say that the judges who wrote this piece of tripe decision already had made up their minds before the case was even heard to invent a right to privacy. And you know what else I think? I think that the justices not only had made up their minds to invent this right to privacy beforehand, but did so with the full intention and knowledge that their decision would eventually be used to invent the right to abortion.

So what are the pro-choice people basing their argument for abortion on? A cheap parlor trick, based on sleight of hand, based on a emanation of a shadow and pulled out of the rectum of a Supreme Court justice (I'd say it "eminated" from the rectum of a Supreme Court justice).

That's the difference between Supreme Court justices and the rest of us. When most of us have gas, we raise a stink, wave our hands and make apologies, when Supreme Court justices have gas, they wave their hands, raise a stink and invent rights that the founding fathers never intended. Someone get those Supreme Court justices some Bean-o quick before they invent the right to cannibalism!!!!

 

[KarlMarx]

Avatar, heaven forbid that anyone should voice an opinion that you disagree with. Reading some of your posts, I occasionally wonder if your mother didn't change her mind in the middle.

Actually, I think your mother tried with you, but you bit the abortion doctor's hand off during the procedure.....

G84, it's a wonder that you haven't sunk any destroyers with that mouth of yours.....

You know that trouble that San Francisco had back a while ago? Most people blamed it on an earthquake, but it was actually G84 having a bad day.

 

[MissileMan]

And somehow the fact that a court calls one legal and the other illegal destroys the analogy?

Ummm, yeah! Not all fertilized eggs are destined to become human beings. Some are aborted by nature, some are aborted by physicians.

 

[KarlMarx]

Ummm, yeah! Not all fertilized eggs are destined to become human beings.

And the rest of us become posters on USMB!

 

[Bullypulpit]

"The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting, it has been found difficult and left untried."

It's amazing how you refuse to actually try something before declaring it unsuccessful.

As for the so called straw man. Knock it down big boy. The intellectually honest people in the world would be able to tell you the only way to 100% avoid the consequences of sex is to save it for marriage. Do you have the integrity to admit that?

There's nothing wrong at all with Christianity. It provides moral guidance that many find useful and comforting. The problem with Christianity, as with so many other religions, is some of its adherents.

Now, little man, why don't you be honest and admit that people will have sex out of wedlock. But if they have the know what options are available to them, unplanned pregnancies and thus abortions, can be avoided and drastically reduced. Straw man knocked down.

BTW, I grew up Christian, and found it wanting.

 

[KarlMarx]

There's nothing wrong at all with Christianity. It provides moral guidance that many find useful and comforting. The problem with Christianity, as with so many other religions, is some of its adherents.

Now, little man, why don't you be honest and admit that people will have sex out of wedlock. But if they have the know what options are available to them, unplanned pregnancies and thus abortions, can be avoided and drastically reduced. Straw man knocked down.

BTW, I grew up Christian, and found it wanting.

So..... by your line of logic, just because people are going to have sex outside of wedlock, we should rewrite the Constitution or at least, "find" (or more appropriately, "invent") rights in the Constitution.

How about

Since people are going to smoke anyway, let's find a right to smoke in the Constitution and forbid states from denying that right to smokers... which means that they should be able to smoke anywhere they please including in bars, restaurants etc (in New York, btw.... smoking in bars, public places and restaurants is banned)

 

[Abbey Normal]

So..... by your line of logic, just because people are going to have sex outside of wedlock, we should rewrite the Constitution or at least, "find" (or more appropriately, "invent") rights in the Constitution.

How about

Since people are going to smoke anyway, let's find a right to smoke in the Constitution and forbid states from denying that right to smokers... which means that they should be able to smoke anywhere they please including in bars, restaurants etc (in New York, btw.... smoking in bars, public places and restaurants is banned)

Ah, but this is the endless circular liberal argument in favor of all bad behavior. Wah, people will do it anyway. Wah, why not just legalize it. It's a cheap and lazy argument, devoid of any hope for humanity to take the high road.

I do agree with one thing that our angry Bullster said: Values are best taught at home. Precisely why I don't want some school administration deciding what my child should be exposed to by and before middle school. For those kids who, as he says, have no parents, a legal guardian should be involved.

Straw man is on his feet and taking a nice walk down the high road.

 

[Bonnie]

I guess I'll decide today to eliminate someone who is an inconvenience in my life. Perhaps the neighbor who plays vile and vulgar rap music until 4:00 AM every night; or perhaps the lady who parks in my favorite spot at the supermarket; or the guy who keeps letting his dog crap on my yard; and so on and so on. Wouldn't that be the essense of choice also? I mean, after all, they are inconveniencing my life.

Because hey "it's my body and I can do what I want with my body" OKay then with my body, my arm specifically I will kill the store clerk with a knife because he over charged me and caused me the inconvenience of having less money in my wallet than should have been there. After all it's my body right??? What do you mean it's illegal?? It's my body right?

 

[no1tovote4]

Ummm, yeah! Not all fertilized eggs are destined to become human beings. Some are aborted by nature, some are aborted by physicians.

Aborted by nature does not involve the direct action of another Human Being to kill the offspring of another. It is the direct action that causes the issue. Those offspring aborted by physicians are not granted the same chance at life that all of us were, through the direct action of another human being the offspring of humans were killed. IMO there is no difference between aborting a fetus than in drowning an infant after birth. Each are dependant on another for life, each are still developing as humans, both are the offspring of two humans and a separate entity of their own. One has a right to do what they wish with their body, not that of another as in abortion. In abortion at least three people enter a room, and when only three only two leave alive...

 

[kurtsprincess]

Wow, this is a compelling argument.

Comparing the legal abortion of a group of cells with the potential to become a human being with the illegal murder of a neighbor or store customer or the guy down the street who doesn't use a pooper-scooper.

Slippery slope MM..........at one time it was illegal to eliminate a fetus just because it was inconveniencing one's life. Today it is legal. Perhaps tomorrow it will be legal to eliminate all inconveniences..........who's to decide when it stops?

 

[MissileMan]

Aborted by nature does not involve the direct action of another Human Being to kill the offspring of another. It is the direct action that causes the issue. Those offspring aborted by physicians are not granted the same chance at life that all of us were, through the direct action of another human being the offspring of humans were killed. IMO there is no difference between aborting a fetus than in drowning an infant after birth. Each are dependant on another for life, each are still developing as humans, both are the offspring of two humans and a separate entity of their own. One has a right to do what they wish with their body, not that of another as in abortion. In abortion at least three people enter a room, and when only three only two leave alive...

You and I have a difference of opinion on when a fertilized egg becomes a person. I'm not for allowing abortions past the first trimester, but during the first trimester I believe a woman should be allowed to terminate a pregnancy should she elect to.

 

[no1tovote4]

You and I have a difference of opinion on when a fertilized egg becomes a person. I'm not for allowing abortions past the first trimester, but during the first trimester I believe a woman should be allowed to terminate a pregnancy should she elect to.

Actually we don't have a difference at when the Zygote becomes a person. To me it is human life regardless of the time they become a person. Amazingly, Buddhism actually talks about the time when one becomes a person, the time when one is able to realize the separate self is when one becomes a person. Regardless of that the life is worth as much before or after the reasoning ability has come into play. That the zygote is the offspring and a separate life has nothing to do with whether it is a person, but whether we value the right to life.

Personally I don't think a woman should be forced into any pregnancy, I just don't think that the goal to end the pregnancy should be the termination of the life within, it is not a zero sum game and there are other options than direct goal-oriented death. The goal should be to remove and protect that life. At first, even today, almost all young fetuses would die, but in time we would be able to bring them to life as well. That and changing the adoption rules to make them easier could insure a valued life rather than the devaluation of life due to age or development stage.

This would bring an actual reproductive choice to women rather than the truncated simplified action that we call choice today...kill your offspring or be pregnant.