Question:

Pro-Choicers support sex education in schools because they say "kids are gonna have sex anyway, we should teach them how to do it 'safely' ".

Using that reasoning, why not teach handgun/shotgun/rifle safety in school?

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 28, 2000

Answers

So your reasoning is something along the lines of: we should teach our children to use guns safely because "they are going to shoot each other anyway"?

I guess I'm not seeing the connection here that you are.

-- better to stop unwanted pregnancies (before@arbortions.arenecessary), April 28, 2000.

Many schools already teach these courses as electives, usually at JROTC and in Hunter Safety Class. Other schools have rifle competition teams. If a school has the money and resources to offer these classes, more power to them.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), April 28, 2000.

If it were up to me, owning a weapon would be strongly encouraged, and training with guns would be a mandatory part of the public school curriculum. Your idea is excellent!

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), April 28, 2000.

Using that reasoning, why not teach handgun/shotgun/rifle safety in school?

Indeed, why not? If the institutional goal is to promote safely in all aspects of life, that would make sense.

On the other hand, I firmly support a return to academic basics and/or solid voc-tech training in the public schools. I don't really think there's enough time to teach subjects like sex education or gun safety with all the other topics that one needs to succeed in a profession or in the trades.

-- (kb8um8@yahoo.com), April 28, 2000.

unwanted

Ever heard of Columbine H.S.?

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 28, 2000.

There's more to it than just training, much as I agree with firearm safety. Teach a wayward child about sex, he's going to have sex. Teach a cruel child to use a weapon, he may use that weapon.

Elbow

-- LBO Grise (LBO Grise@aol.com), April 28, 2000.

Stop,

Yes I've heard of Columbine. Do you think that gun safety courses would have stopped the "Trenchcoat Mafia"? I personally don't think that it would have. I also don't have a problem with teaching gun safety. I just think that your reasoning is flawed. Accurate information on the proper use of contraception does prevent unwanted teen pregnancies and that is a worthwhile goal.

-- unwanted (b@a.an), April 28, 2000.

Teach a wayward child about sex, he's going to have sex.

It seems to me that the question is more: Who do you want to teach your child about sex? Television, the internet, the kid down the street or the parent and/or the teacher?

-- unwanted (b@a.an), April 28, 2000.

Yes, we need better sex education! It should be mandatory that in the 4th grade a female teachur and a male teachur demonstrate the proper copulating techniques. A rigorous exam should follow. We must not graduate children who do not know the correct way to diddle their dingeses.

-- (nemesis@awol.com), April 28, 2000.

Hang on...I think I have a nibble. YES! now firmly set hook...

unwanted

"Do you think that gun safety courses would have stopped the "Trenchcoat Mafia"?

Nope!

"Accurate information on the proper use of contraception..."

Is promoting a sinful lifestyle and over the past 30 years has not prevented unwanted pregnancies; social diseases (including AIDS); is a lie that continues to be told to those gullable enough to believe it!

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 28, 2000.

Contraception and sex education is the source of all our problems today? Oh please. What a troll.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), April 28, 2000.

Among the debris discovered by authorities in the wake of last week's rampage was Mitchell Johnson's hunter-education card. It was all part of fitting in. "Everybody at Westside knows how to shoot a gun," says seventh-grader Michelle Wagner. And of the gun lovers at school, few were as proficient and prominent as Andrew Golden.

Just a quote from h ere.

And since it's obvious now that you're nothing but a troll I'll stop here.

-- unwanted (b@a.an), April 28, 2000.

unwanted

Changing just a few words in your text paints a little different picture, and one just as true. Unfortunately one that has never been reported on.

Among the debris discovered by authorities in the wake of last week's rampage was Mitchell Johnson's sex-education card. It was all part of fitting in. "Everybody at Westside knows how to have sex," says seventh-grader Michelle Wagner. And of the sex lovers at school, few were as proficient and prominent as Andrew Golden.

Teen sex has caused much more damage to lives than any gun ever invented.

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 28, 2000.

On the contrary, abortion has saved countless lives and has, perhaps, been the best thing for our country.

http://www.cycad.com/upstream-list-archive/old-archive/msg02064.html

Here's an excerpt:

"The theoretical justification for our argument rests on two simple assumptions: 1) Legalized abortion leads to fewer "unwanted" babies being born, and 2) unwanted babies are more likely to suffer abuse and neglect and are therefore at an increased risk for criminal involvement later in life.

The first assumption, that abortion reduces the number of unwanted children, is true virtually by definition. The second assumption, that unwanted children are at increased risk for criminal involvement, is supported by three decades of academic research. If one accepts these two assumptions, then a direct mechanism by which the legalization of abortion can reduce crime has been established. At that point, the question merely becomes:

Is the magnitude of the impact large or small? Our preliminary research suggests that the effect of abortion legalization is large. According to our estimates, as much as one- half of the remarkable decline in crime in the 1990s may be attributable to the legalization of abortion. We base our conclusions on four separate data analyses. First, we demonstrate that crime rates began to fall 18 years after the landmark Supreme Court decision Roe vs. Wade legalized abortion across the nation, just the point at which babies born under legalized abortion would be reaching the peak adolescent crime years. In my opinion, this is the weakest of our four data analyses. In a simple time series, many factors are negatively correlated with crime. Furthermore, the world is a complicated place and it would be simplistic to believe that legalized abortion could overpower all other social determinants of crime. Second, we show that the five states that legalized abortion in 1970--three years before Roe vs. Wade--saw crime begin to decrease roughly three years earlier than the rest of the nation. This is a bit more convincing to me but still far from conclusive. Third, we demonstrate that states with high abortion rates in the mid- 1970s have had much greater crime decreases in the 1990s than states that had low abortion rates in the 1970s. This relationship holds true even when we take into account changes in the size of prison populations, number of police, poverty rates, measures of the economy, changes in welfare generosity, and other changes in fertility. This is the evidence that really starts to be convincing, in my opinion. Fourth, we show that the abortion-related drop in crime is occurring only for those who today are under the age of 25. This is exactly the age group we would expect to be affected by the legalization of abortion in the early 1970s. "

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), April 28, 2000.

Steep decreases in the pregnancy rate among sexually experienced teenagers accounted for most of the drop in the overall teenage pregnancy rate in the early-to-mid 1990s. While 20% of the decline is because of decreased sexual activity, 80% is due to more effective contraceptive practice.

facts.

stop,
You can crawl back under your rock now. I'll face up to the world as it really is whether I like it or not.

-- unwanted (b@a.an), April 28, 2000.

As a male, when the day arrives that I can push a nine pound watermellon out of my butt, then I'll have some basis to make an opinion on what a woman should or shouldn't do with her body. Until that day arrives, the decision is hers.

Teach sex in schools? Heck, they're coming out of High School now and can't read or write, for the most part functional illiterate.

As it is, most (not all) parents send their children off to school much like they send their pet dog for obedience training. Teacher friend in Grand Rapids, Michigan no longer laughs about the fact that she and other teachers hide in the school parking lot to catch parents for a teacher parent discussion on their children. Of course this James Bond method works when and if parents are bringing or picking their children up. Otherwise the parents refuse to come to the school for any discussion at all.

If parents took responsibility for their little darlings, taught them such things as sex at home, where it belongs, this discussion wouldn't be going on. Guns? Thousands upon thousands of rural fathers teach their children about guns and there's no problem. There's always gonna be nut-cases and if it isn't guns, it'll be sling shots.

Attempting to cram a personal ideology down everyone's throat is a lost cause.

-- Richard (Astral-Acres@webtv.net), April 28, 2000.

Ape

"On the contrary, abortion has saved countless lives..."

Oh I see. Bill Clinton doesn't inhale but you do?

Now there's an oxy moron if I've ever seen/heard one. Apie my boy, you've been out in the jungle sun just a little too long.

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 28, 2000.

Richard

I posted this in the abortion thread earlier. I feel it a worthy response to your post:

Like it or not, the USA was founded and grown on Judeo-Christian values. Look on the back of most denominations of currency and you will find these words "In God we trust". President Lincoln called for three days of prayer and fasting by the nation to bring an end to the Civil War. Our nations pledge of allegiance has the following phrase "...one nation under GOD...". Our government leaders when being sworn into office place their hand on the Bible. I could go on and on and on.

Christians and Jews in the USA over the past 38 years have allowed those with no morals to overrun us with their lies that we as a nation have swallowed and continue to allow many to go unchecked. Their are still absolutes in this world no matter how much you wish them away and we as Christians and Jews need to stand up for what is right, and this is one subject we must make/take a stand on.

Abortion is WRONG!

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 28, 2000.

It always struck me as odd that prayer was no longer allowed in schools and at about the same time the pledge of allegiance was changed to include "under God'. Does anyone remember which event came first?

-- Pam (jpjgood@penn.com), April 28, 2000.

Stop,

Stop twisting people's words.

Tarzan was refering to this Partial-birth abortion, most commonly known as intact dilation and extraction (D&X), is designed primarily to be used in the case of 5- and 6-month-old fetuses that are dying, malformed, or threaten the womans health or life.

What part don't you understand?

-- (pro@choice.it's my right), April 28, 2000.

pro

"designed primarily..."

Designed primarily and what goes on in the real world are two entirely different things.

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 28, 2000.

Do you have any actual proof that the procedure is being abused?

-- (pro@choice.it's my right), April 28, 2000.

[snip]

Eric Harrah, a former abortion clinic worker, said "live births" were the industry's "dirty little secret."

"It was always very disturbing," said Harrah, "so the doctor would try to conceal it from the rest of the staff."

[snip]

As reported by the New York Times, Fitzsimmons admitted that in "the vast majority of cases, the procedure is performed on a healthy mother with a healthy fetus that is 20 weeks or more along."

[snip]

"The pro-choice movement has lost a lot of credibility during this debate, not just with the general public, but with our pro-choice friends in Congress," Fitzsimmons told American Medical News.

Partial Birth Abortion

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 28, 2000.

pro@choice.it's my right

Is that enough or would you like the pictures too?

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 28, 2000.

~silence~

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 28, 2000.

I've seen the pictures.

I don't agree that this procedure should be used on healthy women or fetuses. But to take away the choice of abortion altogether is a huge step backwards.

-- (pro@choice.it's my right), April 28, 2000.

Hey, wasn't that Fitzsimmons guy the one who was caught lying to congress? Nice source.

-- Bystander (bystander@standingby.com), April 28, 2000.

"...healthy women or fetuses."

How 'bout healthy women or "babies". The term 'fetus' was thought up to impersonalize the 'baby' women were carrying and about to abort. This was/is done to shed the guilt or stigma attached with aborting a healthy baby.

Ingenius really....loose the stigma and the abortion becomes easy to deal with emotionally.

Baby=Guilt Fetus=Impersonal

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 28, 2000.

"Hey, wasn't that Fitzsimmons guy the one who was caught lying to congress?"

Gotta link to the story?

If not, it's kinda like someone asking when you stoped beating your wife.

If you have something to show him to be a liar put it here for all to see. Until then as they say, "Put up or shut up!"

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 28, 2000.

From The American Heritage Dictionary...

Fetus...the unborn young from the end of the eigth week to the moment of birth as distingushed from the earlier embryo.

-- (pro@choice. it's my right), April 28, 2000.

"Fetus...the unborn young from the end..."

Your point? I mean other than 'fetus' can be found in any dictionary you may happen to pick up.

If it was to point out to me, you or someone else didn't just create the term last night while at the dinner table I already knew that. The term has been around for MANY years. That doesn't change the reason for it's creation.

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 28, 2000.

Are you saying the term fetus was created for the desensitizing purpose of abortion? Or has it always been medical terminology? And used as such.

(I have to end this for tonight...prior engagement :)

-- (pro@choice.it's my choice), April 28, 2000.

"Are you saying the term fetus was created for the desensitizing purpose of abortion?"

Absolutely! Oh I'm sure we will get someone posting here after this showing the "real roots" of the term but think about this. Why create a new term when 'baby' was already being used to describe an unborn child and replace it with 'fetus'?

The terms 'Fetus' and 'unviable tissue mass' were brought onboard at roughly the same time.

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 28, 2000.

The term "fetus" has been in use since the 14th Century. Check your dictionary.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), April 28, 2000.

"Why create a new term when 'baby' was already being used to describe an unborn child and replace it with 'fetus'?"

May I ask WHO was using the term BABY to describe an unborn child?

YOU may choose to call a maggot a "baby fly", but *I* choose to call a maggot a maggot.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), April 28, 2000.

Stop-

It doesn't take a genius to see that unwanted children are less likely to row up to be good citizens. When women are forced into motherhood, everyone suffers.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), April 28, 2000.

"YOU may choose to call a maggot a "baby fly", but *I* choose to call a maggot a maggot."

How can anyone compare human life to that of a flies?

WOW!

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 28, 2000.

Ape

"...unwanted children are less likely to row up to be good citizens."

Ever heard of adoption?

"When women are forced into motherhood, everyone suffers."

Not nearly as much as the baby that is killed because someone wanted to exercise her 'right' of 'choice'.

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 28, 2000.

Adoption is a wonderful option, if you're lucky enough to get an adoptive family.

Unfortunately, the dirty secret of adoption is that people are lined up for years to adopt healthy, white infants. If you're not healthy, not white, or older than an infant, your chances for adoption decrease exponentially.

I have personal experience with this. My fiance is a non-white person who languished in foster care for 18 months before the agency found a couple who weren't concerned with whether a child shared their race. Today, she herself works as an adoption agent, and is aware of several couples who are willing to wait for two or three years rather than adopt an infant who's of a different race or past their "cuddly" age (i.e., more than 12-18 months old).

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), April 28, 2000.

Fetus--wasn't he Marshall Dillon's comical sidekick?

-- (nemesis@awol.com), April 29, 2000.

Stop,

Personally I'm opposed to abortion, but would absolutely LOVE to have riflemanship courses taught in schools, beginning with safety and .22 cal in ~7th grade.

Frank

P.S. I started shooting with pop and in the Boy Scouts in the 4th grade, and haven't shot anybody yet. My daughter's about to turn 7, and I've told her that after her first communion I'll get her her first .22. Obviously, she won't get to shoot it until she's had so much safety instruction drilled into her head she won't even WANT to shoot it, but I'm really looking forward to going shooting with her, the same as I like riding bikes with her. -F

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), April 29, 2000.

I dont understand how we got to teaching gun-lessons in school, but IMHO, IF that were taught, it would have, in the Columbine case, just made "EXPERTS" and more lives lost, no?

Just MHO, BTW, for the record, I am NOT against guns, just the morons who kill people for NO good reason.

-- consumer (shh@aol.com), April 29, 2000.

"How can anyone compare human life to that of a flies?"

Who compared human life to a fly? You stated that the term "baby" was already being used to describe a fetus. YOU stated that the term "fetus" was CREATED by those with an interest in promoting abortion.

I have no doubt that some people tell toddlers that "Mommy has a baby in her stomach." I've even heard stories of pumpkin patches and storks being involved. My question still hasn't been answered. WHO was using the term "baby" to describe a fetus?

BTW, sex education in schools doesn't always include contraception, and I've not heard the statement by pro-choicers included in your original post on this thread. I haven't yet decided whether you're getting your information from a script or making it up as you go along.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), April 29, 2000.

Ape

"Adoption is a wonderful option, if you're lucky enough to get an adoptive family. "

Adoption demand for newborn babies is astronomically high! I personally know a couple that traveled to Russia a couple years ago so they could adopt. In that case the child was already 1 1.2 years old.

Get this, the total cost of travel/accomodations from the U.S.A. to Russia including legal work came to $20,000! I have never asked them but I would guess that if a baby was available for adoption stateside they would have taken that option first.

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 29, 2000.

err better make that "...already 1 1/2 years old."

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 29, 2000.

anita

"WHO was using the term "baby" to describe a fetus?"

Every family that wants the 'baby' uses the term 'baby'. Every woman exercising 'her choice' or would be willing to do so declares she is carrying a 'fetus'.

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 29, 2000.

I see where you're going with this, Stop, but you're still incorrect. Folks that WANT a baby have still made a CHOICE. You're suggesting that PRO-CHOICE people are PRO-ABORTION people. This isn't true at all.

Read this and let me know if you understand the difference, or whether this simply doesn't fit in with the script you've been given.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), April 29, 2000.

I'm sorry, Stop, but you're just plain wrong. According to the Child Welfare League of America, transracial adoptions account for LESS THAN 4% of adoptions in the US. Minority children account for 40% of children available for adoption. Moreover, caucasian children spend an average of 10 months waiting for a family, while "children of color" (i.e., black, hispanic, asian) wait an average of 2.9 years.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), April 29, 2000.

Ape

I will agree in part. Yes, minority children wait longer for adoption. As for a 10 month waiting period for others, my guess it is because of bueraucratic red tape. The demand for babies/infants is very strong. We need to get our government out of the way sooner so these children can be placed quicker.

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 29, 2000.

Anita

"Read this..."

This thing is longer than War & Peace! Can ya condense just a little? "You're suggesting that PRO-CHOICE people are PRO-ABORTION people. This isn't true at all."

Yea, right! Sounds like you're indoctrination is 'N.O.W.' complete. (Grin)

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 29, 2000.

Stop:

Obviously you've never read WAR AND PEACE. The read requires perhaps 7 minutes of your time. I'd be interested in your opinions AFTER you've read it, but I'm not interested in your opinions about MY indoctrination.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), April 29, 2000.

"The read requires perhaps 7 minutes of your time."

This thing must be over 15 pages long! If YOU have a point to make, make it. I don't plan on reading a novel tonight.

P.S. Probably my Last post of the weekend. ...back on Monday

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 29, 2000.

From..Anita's link..

Late Term Abortion

While not many people would seek to encourage MORE late-term abortions (or any abortions, for that matter), and there is much ambivalence about 3rd trimester abortions even in among those who call themselves "pro-choice," emphasizing that a better approach is to prevent the need with proper teaching of values, sex education, and birth control measures. In the end, the choice remains the mother's as to what she will do with her own body, and who she will permit to occupy that body.

I heard an example on the Tom Leykis show some time back of a woman who had a late term "partial birth" abortion. The reason she didn't PREVENT the pregnancy is that it was not an unplanned pregnancy at all. She and her husband had been trying to conceive for five years, and they had great hopes and excitement in the pregnancy. Late in the pregnancy, however, it was determined that there was a serious deformity. The child's brain was growing outside its head. It would be born dead, or would most likely die soon after birth. With great sadness, the couple made the choice to terminate the pregnancy in the 3rd trimester. I heard the anguish in that woman's voice as she described the terrible ordeal of making that choice. Whether you think she made the right decision or not, it was a very personal choice only she and her husband and doctor and priest could make. No, let me rephrase that -- it was a choice only SHE could make, with advice from her husband, doctor or priest if she wanted that advice.

The reality of late-term abortion is that

a) it is extremely, extremely rare

b) it is used primarily to terminate pregnancies that were wanted, but in which something has gone wrong

c) it is being exploited by those opposed to women's reproductive self-determination as a means of demonizing all abortions, including first-term abortions (when almost 90% of all abortions actually occur) which have little if any resemblance to abortions in late term.

-- (pro@choice.it's my right/choice), April 29, 2000.

Before I go, a few comments are in order....

STM "This thing is longer than War & Peace!" Anita "Obviously you've never read WAR AND PEACE."

Obviously you didn't detect the humor implied.

STM "Yea, right! Sounds like you're indoctrination is 'N.O.W.' complete. (Grin)" Anita "...but I'm not interested in your opinions about MY indoctrination."

Anita "...this simply doesn't fit in with the script you've been given."

Do ya think you can lighten up? Just a little, maybe?

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 29, 2000.

Folks, you can argue with this fool, who wants to legislate personal and private behavior 'till the end of time, but it won't do one bit of good. She sees herself as a great savior of the unborn. She's having a fine time, showing pictures of her dead fetuses, spreading the gospel of Stop the Murder, and trying to lay guilt on everyone for even condoning what is none of her damned business. Then she has the never to ask Anita to lighten up. Believe me, she's looking forward to Monday morning when she can begin bleating for "babies" again.

-- gilda (jess@listbot.com), April 29, 2000.

Stop,

Why are you asking Anita to lighten up?

You came on pretty heavy with the graphics...right?

See my previous post.

-- (pro@choice.it's my right/choice), April 29, 2000.

Anita, once again, you astound me with your resources, and your clear thinking. Actually, I feel like I'm thinking much more clearly having read the info on the website you linked to. Incredible!

Here's a part of the email I just sent to the author:

"I have never been "pro" abortion, yet I've always felt that legislation requiring a woman to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term just wasn't right. I have always felt a little bit hypocritical having both of these seeminly irreconcilable views.

Thanks so much for helping me come to terms with this conflict. A lot of your analogies are superb. I am much more comfortable now with my stance on abortion."

I now can comfortably support my position on abortion without equivocation or guilt. I'm going to print a hard copy to keep on hand to help remember some of the finer points (I'm fresh out of gingko viagra :)

"Stop", I recommend that you take the trouble to read this. If you are truly interested in understanding this issue, you'd best look at it. If you're just another dogmatist, don't bother; you wouldn't want to learn anything different than you already know.

Thanks a million, Anita, for posting this. Wow.

JOJ, feeling GOOD!

-- jumpoff joe (jumpoff@echoweb.neet), April 29, 2000.

Pro

"The reality of late-term abortion is that

a) it is extremely, extremely rare

b) it is used primarily to terminate pregnancies that were wanted, but in which something has gone wrong

c) it is being exploited by those opposed to women's reproductive self-determination as a means of demonizing all abortions, including first-term abortions (when almost 90% of all abortions actually occur) which have little if any resemblance to abortions in late term. "

Once again, here is the truth you don't want to see or know about that has been posted TWICE before.

[snip]

Eric Harrah, a former abortion clinic worker, said "live births" were the industry's "dirty little secret."

"It was always very disturbing," said Harrah, "so the doctor would try to conceal it from the rest of the staff."

[snip]

As reported by the New York Times, Fitzsimmons admitted that in "the vast majority of cases, the procedure is performed on a healthy mother with a healthy fetus that is 20 weeks or more along."

[snip]

"The pro-choice movement has lost a lot of credibility during this debate, not just with the general public, but with our pro-choice friends in Congress," Fitzsimmons told American Medical News.

Partial Birth Abortion

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 29, 2000.

Pro

"You came on pretty heavy with the graphics...right? " The truth isn't always easy to take....but it was/is the truth.

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 29, 2000.

gilda

"She's having a fine time, "

If you had bothered to follow the discussion after you dropped out it two days ago when you found a picture that gave you a bad case of a nagging guilt ridden conscience, you would have learned this case of mistaken sexual identity was cleared up then. Maybe this time you won't run away and hide if you happen to see a picture you find unsettling. Either way, it will help you and the rest of us if you actually take the time to read the previous posts on the threads you jump in the middle of and not simply expect everyone else to bring YOU up to speed just because her royal highness gilda has arrived!

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 29, 2000.

Stop,

You're outta line...grasping at straws, I see.

Gilda,

eve "But actually you're not sure how you would decide?" It would not be my decision alone to make. My wife's opinion (Big Grin) would carry much weight.

if your next question to me would be something like: "If she were unconscious..." being a Christian I would first have serious prayer time and discuss the particulars over closely with the doctors prior to making any decision.

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 29, 2000.

-- (pro@choice.it's my right/choice), April 29, 2000.

pro

Like MORE documentation?

Try this, one of your OWN 'abortion rights' leaders:

From

Abortion rights leader urges end to "half truths"

When Fitzsimmons criticizes his movement for its handling of this issue, he points the finger at himself first. In November 1995, he was interviewed by "Nightline" and, in his own words, "lied," telling the reporter that women had these abortions only in the most extreme circumstances of life endangerment or fetal anomaly.

Although much of his interview landed on the cutting room floor, "it was not a shining moment for me personally," he said.

After that, he stayed out of the debate.

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 29, 2000.

"Stop",

I have no doubt you are extremely passionate in your belief; a belief to which you are more than entitled. But a couple of things strike me here. You said on a previous thread that you had experienced an abortion and this (your actions here on this board) was your way of relieving yourself of the guilt associated with said abortion. I seem to remember you also indicated that you were not a woman. How do you think your wife/partner/whoever actually had that abortion feels about your constant preaching? Do you think that woman can ever put it behind her and get on with her life? Do you think it's fair to her that you perpetuate the guilt?

I think you need to work out your "guilt" in other ways. You may think you're releasing it by trying to put it on others, but it's just a temporary salve. You are the only one who suffers and until you face up to yourself, you will continue to suffer. All your "morality" and all your "pictures" and all your "preaching" serve only to embed your own guilt deeper into your psyche. Unless you release it, it's going to be with you forever. And you will be nothing more than a miserable person making everyone around you miserable as well, possibly to the point where no one will want to be around you.

Further, if you think you can "save yourself" or absolve your own guilt by bringing others around to your line of thinking (or worse, trying to place that guilt on others), you are going about this the wrong way. That's self-serving and from what I learned as a child in catholic school, that's a no-no on the path to salvation. One should do a deed because it benefits another; not because it benefits onesself (sp?).

You state "abortion is immoral", but who are you to decide what is moral and what is immoral for anyone other than yourself? I am an adult and as such I am perfectly capable of knowing right from wrong; moral from amoral. I suspect it's the same for the rest of the adults on this board.

Do you ever approach this issue logically instead of emotionally? Do you ever think about it past the "righteous indignation" or the "murder" cry? The facts cited by Tarzan never seem to enter the "debate" on the "pro-life" side. Yes, part of the reason for the long wait to adopt a child is the bureaucratic red tape, but most of the reason is for lack of "cute and cuddly kids" (why do you think there are so many "black-market" type adoptions or "babies for sale"?). Once those children reach a certain age (and I would guess 18 months sounds about right), no one wants them any more. And heaven forbid they are minority children -- no one wants them PERIOD. So we have massive numbers of unwanted children, turned out on their own at the ripe old age of 18. Do you really believe they are prepared for life or for adulthood? How many of them do you think even make it to adulthood? Is this really the world you want to see? Is this really the world you want to live in?

I read recently that approximately 77% of the "pro-life" leaders are men; yet, 100% of them will never get pregnant. A saying I heard many years ago also comes to mind: If men were the ones who got pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament. The more I read of the "pro- life movement", the more I realize how true that is.

-- Patricia (PatriciaS@lasvegas.com), April 29, 2000.

Heres the proceedure that the 'Pro-Choice' leaders don't want you to see or 'feel' anything for.

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 29, 2000.

Stop,

I agree that healthy women and fetuses shouldn't be having that procedure.

What more do you want me to say?

-- (pro@choice.it's my right/choice), April 29, 2000.

Stop the murder, Did you get a chance to read the link provided by Anita? It's really good. It's helped me come to terms with what seemed paradoxical before, namely my dislike of the idea of abortion and my dislike of having government tell women what to do with their own bodies.

After reading this piece, I tried to put myself into a woman's body, so to speak. Ok, so I'm pregnant. My birth control method failed, I wa raped, whatever. Regardless, I'm not going to carry this "baby" to term, I'm sure of that. Now I have to decide how long to carry the little thing. The longer I wait, the more obvious it will be that I fucked up, so to speak, and the more people will be asking me what happened to end my pregnancy. This is a question I don't particularly want to have to answer to everyone I know.

Also, I am trying to think of a single reason to put up with all the negative health issues that go along with being pregnant--not to mention the fact that I HATE nausea, and would do most anything to avoid puking, especially every day for god knows how many weeks.

Then there's the issue of when a "fetus" becomes a "baby". I know there's a lot of debate about this one, but one thing's for sure; a fetus I've been carrying nine months is bound to be harder on me emotionally, as well as physically, to abort, and I'm afraid I'd have nightmares for months or even years if I thought that I'd killed a fetus which COULD have been a baby, if it had come early.

All in all, I guess I'd just go ahead and get it over with, while I'm "barely" pregnant, know what I mean. It's like, if somebody had carried the thing for nine months, like why would they SUDDENLY DECIDE to abort it? I mean, I change my mind a lot, but that would be a bit far fetched EVEN FOR ME!

I think those moms who have late term abortions are either afraid for their own lives, or they have found out, late in the game, tha their precious "baby" has such severe retardation that they have to give it up for their own, as well as for the fetus's, own good.

Tell you what, girls. If somebody asked me, as a man, to carry a pregnancy full term, and I didn't want to, do you think I'd do it, just to make THEM feel good about themselves?

You got that right, baby!

JOJ

-- jumpoff joe (jumpoff@echoweb.neet), April 29, 2000.

"What more do you want me to say?"

Maybe to give your general view on abortion a little closer self examination. That's all I can ask of you.

God gave us all free will....it's up to each one of us to choose our own destinies. He has however, written this best selling book that may be worth a read once in a while (Grin).

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 29, 2000.

Don't shove your religon down my throat...it makes me gag.

I have a very tight grasp on my views...and they are RIGHT AND JUST.

-- (pro@choice.it's my right/choice), April 29, 2000.

jumpoff joe

I'd really love to discuss this with you more, but I must go. I tried to duck outta here before but came back to fend off some rather obnoxious comments by gilda.

I promise to come back to the discussion on Monday. I pray we can continue to discuss this in a civil manner. I'd like to thank most of you for doing so and enjoy the opportunity to chat.

God Bless, see you Monday.

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 29, 2000.

"Don't shove your religon..."

Sigh...

-- Stop The Murder (abortion@kills_our_kids.com), April 29, 2000.

***sigh***

That's all folks!

-- (pro@choice.it's my right/choice), April 29, 2000.

Stop, thanks for the link. I found it very interesting also. However, I still think it's a woman's right to make the decision. By the way, the main topic was fetuses of 20-24 weeks, over a month before the third term starts, and before the fetus would be viable outside the womb.

I still doubt that there are many people who'd wait until the third tirmester for an abortion. In fact, your link supports that conclusion, doen't it?

JOJ

-- jumpoff joe (jumpoff@echoweb.neet), April 29, 2000.

Well, you can call my unvarnished truth "obnoxious comments" if you want to Mrs. Murder, but I do not always operate by the rules according to Ms. Manners. Sometimes it cuts the crap to just say what one thinks, instead of pretending we're discussing drapery fabric over tea and crumpets.

I find your graphics obnoxious, and your pseudo-sweet manner obnoxious, as you say, "He [God] has however, written this bestselling book that may be worth a read once in awhile." Then your little (Grin.) to show you're soooooo nice. Baloney. You brought up the subject, so don't get your shorts in a twist if we don't all handle your properly worded diatribe in a repentinent, kindly manner. As ProChoice said, "Don't shove your religion down my throat it makes me gag."

And as far as God writing the Bible, BALONEY. Your God did not write A Word of it. It was written by mortal men, in an early, superstitious, primitive age, and is more myth than fact. Jesus did not write it either, though he has many things attributed to him by others. So much for your Bible thumping. If you enjoy it fine, but you needn't preach to the adults here.

You come on here with your graphic photos, reeking bathos and melodrama, meant to induce guilt, sorrow and shame, and then you call my comments obnoxious. So be it.

You "pray" we can continue this discussion in a "civil manner." Then you say, "God gave us all free will" so that we can "choose our own destinies." Yes, we both have free will. You've chosen to call abortions murder. Some of us choose to call it choice. If a woman doesn't have the choice to control her own body, then she doesn't have control over a damn thing that amounts to a hill of beans.

You say you "enjoy the opportunity to chat." Seems to me you just want to proselytize your point of view, in the hope of making converts to your narrow cause. And if your think your Grand Standing photos gave me " a bad case of nagging guilt ridden conscience," you are bad wrong. My conscience is fine. I don't try and lay guilt on anyone for what they do in matters like this for that is their own personal and private business, not yours.

Also, Ms. Obnoxious, I only dropped out of the discussion for four days because our computer was in the shop--ever heard of that?? It took me quite awhile after we got it back, yesterday, to read all the posts, which I did. Now are you done making false accusations about me not reading the posts and other comments you spouted without knowing what you are talking about.

And by the way, your article by the writer for World Net Daily is pure bias. WND is a rag! It is a model of innuendos and yellow journalism--half-truths veiled as truth. Read a reputable writer or paper, and you might learn something.

-- gilda (jess@listbot.com), April 30, 2000.

Oh, BTW, I'm quite aware of your sex. It's just that to me you seem to be a holier-than-thou, whiney, Ms. Holy-Sanctified-Wonder. I even read you goofiness about comparing a baby to a fly--a deliberate attempt to distort what someone said. You remind me of that idiot Folger woman in the Religious Right.

And frankly I'm damn sick and tired of men telling women what they should do about something that isn't happening to them. I think I've referred to you as she, Mrs. and Ms., and so Miss Wonderful, with balls, (supposedly) carry on your crusade, being the good Christian that you aren't. Hey dude, when you start having babies, then you have a right to make the decisions, otherwise Miss Righteous- go to Search Result Anti-Abortion and stay there, with the rest of the I Know Best Crowd. (Grin)

-- gilda (jess@listbot.com), April 30, 2000.

Yo, Gilda, go for it, girl! You are right on, and you're covering all the bases!

What in the HELL is World Net Daily trying to do with their total bullshit "new" reporting? Do they get enouch advertising from those businesses trying to get the idiot crowd to part with their money to make a profit? Hard to believe. Maybe there are more gullible fools on the internet than I thought...

JOJ

-- jumpoff joe (jumpoff@echoweb.neet), April 30, 2000.

Gilda, you said,

"Hey dude, when you start having babies, then you have a right to make the decisions,

While this debate doesn't apply to me personally, I'd think that since men have to PAY (=work part of their lifetimes) for the children produced, they should have a say in what happens to them, one way or the other.

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), May 01, 2000.