ObamaCare - exchanges ,report your states options!

[PLAYER57832]

The only education being taught it how best to have sex, not how to say no to it. Many times flying in the face of the values the family is trying to teach their kids.

I see, so why is it, then that the rate of teen pregnancies DO DOWN when true sex education is implemented as opposed to the "abstinence only" garbage you claim is "superior?" (I gave several citations earlier, but google Texas teen pregnancy rates if you wish to see the data again).

Sex education does NOT teach "how best to have sex" and whome ever told you that is an absolute idiot or a flat out liar. (probably the latter)

What it really covers is the basic biology, the physical facts of how pregnancy occurs, what happens in fetal development (various life stages), impacts on the mother. A good program will go into prenatal nutrition, talk a bit about how nutrition. excercise, drugs/alchohol impact fetal health. It talks about STDs -- the symptoms and impacts of the diseases, how they are transmitted and yes, a bit about ways to help minimize risk of getting or transmitting disease. BUT, that nothing is 100% except abstinence. A good program talks a bit more than just the pure physical mechanics. It also talks about the difficulties in having a teen pregnancy (physically, emotionally, financially) and how easy it is for someone who thinks they "want to say no" to get cooerced into saying "yes". (One saying we got was "a kiss is upper persuasion for lower invasion") In most cases, morals/religion are not directly addressed, but parents are told IN ADVANCE (usually in an evening meeting, but with time made for parents who cannot attend then) what their kids will be taught so they can pair the school teachings with home education. Also, religion and ethics do tend to come in the teens discussions in class. The teacher's role there is to keep the kids respectful and considerate of their classmate's views, while ensuring that the basics are covered. How to prevent pregnancies and abortion are covered, along with real facts about the medical risks and the realities. Again, the fact that no birth control is 100% is absolutely covered. So is the emotional and physical impacts of abortion.. legal and illegal.

NOW, explain how that is "teaching kids how best to have sex, how not to say no... flying in the face of the values the family is trying to teach.

Try actually looking into things before you go of the deep end.

The kind of education to which you refer is used for ADULTS who specifically seek out help with problems. This includes people who have been abused people who become disabled (or who are considering marrying/will marry) a disabled individual and others who need help with one aspect or another. Joke all you want, but some people do need "instructions". (and no.. we did not!)

If elective abortions are disallowed, trying to have them would be like risking to do anything else illegal: if you choose to do it, you may get hurt. Murder is a risk that drug dealers and buyers take when they choose to break the law, so the consequences of obtaining an illegal abortion are what the woman chooses to risk.

I see, and the lives of any children that women might have ... those just don't matter , either?

Look, a MAJOR reason many women have or are advised to have abortions in later pregnancies is because going ahead, trying to carry a child with major, major issues often presents a serious risk to the mother's future child-bearing capacity. Its not just about not wanting to raise a disabled child, its also about wanting to protect future children that are not going to be disabled.

Anyone who chooses to have sex takes on those risks and consequences and shouldn't be allowed a cop-out when it involves the termination of another life.

I see, so you are willing to do that?

OOOPS... you WILL NEVER HAVE TO FACE THAT CHOICE! So don't try to tell me what you would or would not do. YOU DO NOT KNOW!

And yes, I know of PLENTY of people who thought they "knew" only to find that their minds changed when they faced the real situation. You, obviously do not have enough life experience yet to have been down that road. HOW DARE YOU JUDGE THOSE WHO HAVE!

Furthermore, you just said in the first paragraph that you did not even want teens to KNOW the basics, so guess what.. without decent education, they are even more likely to have an at-risk birth. A child in young years, a child under poor health conditions (improper base nutrition, etc.).

You are not talking Christianity. You are talking your own personnal thoughts.

Killing a 4 month old baby is outlawed, so killing a baby 4 months from birth should be as well.

[/quote]

"killing" a 5 month fetus is not allowed except in extreme circumstances, such as when the mother's life is in danger.


OH... and did you happen to miss the part above where it specifically compares the rate of very liberal Netherlands to the very strict Communist Romania? The ABORTION RATE IN HOLLAND IS THE LOWEST IN THE WORLD... around 5.4% as compered to the US rate of around 28%.

ALSO.. DO note that the US rate includes physical removeal of miscarriages! That is the other big part you "knee jerkers" ignore. Because there is no definition of "life", no statistics are kept on whether a child already died prior to removal or not (unless the child is old enough to get a death certificate). Instead, the "abortion" rate looks purely at procedures. There is a roughly 30% pregnancy failure rate in the first trimester. So, a lot of those "nasty terrible murderers" are women in the very worst time of their life... and they have to face people like you, not only on the street, but even in the hospitals. I know, because that happened to me!

[Night Strike]

Thank you again for failing at quoting posts, this time contributing your comments to me.

OH... and did you happen to miss the part above where it specifically compares the rate of very liberal Netherlands to the very strict Communist Romania? The ABORTION RATE IN HOLLAND IS THE LOWEST IN THE WORLD... around 5.4% as compered to the US rate of around 28%.

ALSO.. DO note that the US rate includes physical removeal of miscarriages! That is the other big part you "knee jerkers" ignore. Because there is no definition of "life", no statistics are kept on whether a child already died prior to removal or not (unless the child is old enough to get a death certificate). Instead, the "abortion" rate looks purely at procedures. There is a roughly 30% pregnancy failure rate in the first trimester. So, a lot of those "nasty terrible murderers" are women in the very worst time of their life... and they have to face people like you, not only on the street, but even in the hospitals. I know, because that happened to me!

So the stats about the number of abortions in the US are exaggerated by your own admission yet you use it to try to prove your point? I never once said removing a fetus from the body after a natural death should be outlawed. It's the induced killings that are the problems.

[Woodruff]

The only education being taught it how best to have sex, not how to say no to it.

This simply is not even close to the truth. In fact, I must call it an outright lie. Both in Reno and here in Lincoln, the sex education requirements are quite balanced and in fact show NOTHING AT ALL about "how best to have sex". Both courses focus primarily on the consequences of sex, such as disease and pregnancy, as well as how to deal with peer pressure regarding the subject.

[PLAYER57832]

Thank you again for failing at quoting posts, this time contributing your comments to me.

OH... and did you happen to miss the part above where it specifically compares the rate of very liberal Netherlands to the very strict Communist Romania? The ABORTION RATE IN HOLLAND IS THE LOWEST IN THE WORLD... around 5.4% as compered to the US rate of around 28%.

ALSO.. DO note that the US rate includes physical removeal of miscarriages! That is the other big part you "knee jerkers" ignore. Because there is no definition of "life", no statistics are kept on whether a child already died prior to removal or not (unless the child is old enough to get a death certificate). Instead, the "abortion" rate looks purely at procedures. There is a roughly 30% pregnancy failure rate in the first trimester. So, a lot of those "nasty terrible murderers" are women in the very worst time of their life... and they have to face people like you, not only on the street, but even in the hospitals. I know, because that happened to me!

So the stats about the number of abortions in the US are exaggerated by your own admission yet you use it to try to prove your point?

Read again. The numbers are not exaggerated. The data is real, you just never bothered to discover what the numbers actually MEAN. The numbers refer to the numbers of fetuses surgically removed, not the number of fully elective abortions. Procedure, not intent is what is documented.

I never once said removing a fetus from the body after a natural death should be outlawed. It's the induced killings that are the problems.

And you conveniently ignore the fact that laws against abortion have that very impact, as you conveniently ignore the fact that the right of a woman to have an abortion when her life is at risk is ALSO being attacked, is also being removed by folks like you... oh, yes, and let's not forget your comment that "dying".."is the consequence" of having sex.

You fail on many points of logic, including this.

The FACTS are that Holland, where abortion on demand is fully legal, has the lowest rate of abortion in the world, whereas Old Romania, with some of the most restrictive policies on the planet had among the very highest rates of abortion AND post pregnancy mortality rates. Further, once the restrictions on abortions were removed, the rate of abortions went down AND the rates of survival for pregnant women went up.

The FACTS are that BOTH teen pregnancies AND abortions went up when "abstinence only" "education" was employed in parts of Texas. They go down when real sex education is begun.

The FACTS are that you espouse absolutely idiotic untruths, show no knowledge at all of what is taught in sex education, but claim to have the right to oppose it, despite your utter ignorance.

And, this idea that a death sentence is somehow justice for having sex (only for women, of course) is utterly repugnant and yes, EVIL. I mean, it seems you would be much happier in Saudia Arabia. The stone women there for infidelity! Saves the trouble of even worrying about medical bills, there.

(yes, Woodruff, I AM calling Phattscotty's ideas outright evil, becuase, in this case, they ARE!)

[PLAYER57832]

PS (with a thanks to harry potter for providing the chart)


Oh, and just to be clear -- Infant mortality rates do NOT include abortions. So don't try to claim that abortions are why this rate is so high now.

[PLAYER57832]

Player, I can't decipher your post.

Try reading.

I did read, but nearly the entire post was my own words because you again failed at using quote tags properly. Fix the quote tags and people may be able read what you write.

So you find it impossible to tell the difference between what you wrote and I wrote without quote tags? And here I thought the ideas were pretty different!

[Night Strike]

Player, I can't decipher your post.

Try reading.

I did read, but nearly the entire post was my own words because you again failed at using quote tags properly. Fix the quote tags and people may be able read what you write.

So you find it impossible to tell the difference between what you wrote and I wrote without quote tags? And here I thought the ideas were pretty different!

Because I don't reread what I wrote if it's quoted because I know what I wrote.

PS (with a thanks to harry potter for providing the chart)


Oh, and just to be clear -- Infant mortality rates do NOT include abortions. So don't try to claim that abortions are why this rate is so high now.

Of course that rate wouldn't count abortions because those people don't believe they're humans. I forgot the reason why the US rate was higher, but I remember something about how we report some additional statistics that other nations don't (something like pre-birth deaths I think).

Thank you again for failing at quoting posts, this time contributing your comments to me.

OH... and did you happen to miss the part above where it specifically compares the rate of very liberal Netherlands to the very strict Communist Romania? The ABORTION RATE IN HOLLAND IS THE LOWEST IN THE WORLD... around 5.4% as compered to the US rate of around 28%.

ALSO.. DO note that the US rate includes physical removeal of miscarriages! That is the other big part you "knee jerkers" ignore. Because there is no definition of "life", no statistics are kept on whether a child already died prior to removal or not (unless the child is old enough to get a death certificate). Instead, the "abortion" rate looks purely at procedures. There is a roughly 30% pregnancy failure rate in the first trimester. So, a lot of those "nasty terrible murderers" are women in the very worst time of their life... and they have to face people like you, not only on the street, but even in the hospitals. I know, because that happened to me!

So the stats about the number of abortions in the US are exaggerated by your own admission yet you use it to try to prove your point?

Read again. The numbers are not exaggerated. The data is real, you just never bothered to discover what the numbers actually MEAN. The numbers refer to the numbers of fetuses surgically removed, not the number of fully elective abortions. Procedure, not intent is what is documented.

Then find the number of elective abortions that kill the fetus done every year. I contend that 1 is too many.

I never once said removing a fetus from the body after a natural death should be outlawed. It's the induced killings that are the problems.

And you conveniently ignore the fact that laws against abortion have that very impact, as you conveniently ignore the fact that the right of a woman to have an abortion when her life is at risk is ALSO being attacked, is also being removed by folks like you... oh, yes, and let's not forget your comment that "dying".."is the consequence" of having sex.

I have never once stated that abortion should be outlawed when the mother's life is at stake. You thinking I have is complete distortion.

[PLAYER57832]

I have never once stated that abortion should be outlawed when the mother's life is at stake. You thinking I have is complete distortion.

Actually, you have said, more than once, that taking a life to save another is not OK.

Not to mention this little "gem" here:

If elective abortions are disallowed, trying to have them would be like risking to do anything else illegal: if you choose to do it, you may get hurt. Murder is a risk that drug dealers and buyers take when they choose to break the law, so the consequences of obtaining an illegal abortion are what the woman chooses to risk.

Pretty abhorrant. I don't believe that getting unintentionally pregnant or having a child you know is doomed and being desperate deserve a death sentence.

So the stats about the number of abortions in the US are exaggerated by your own admission yet you use it to try to prove your point?

Read again. The numbers are not exaggerated. The data is real, you just never bothered to discover what the numbers actually MEAN. The numbers refer to the numbers of fetuses surgically removed, not the number of fully elective abortions. Procedure, not intent is what is documented.

Then find the number of elective abortions that kill the fetus done every year. I contend that 1 is too many.

So do I, but unlike you, I understand that making abortion illegal is about knee-jerk reactionism, not reducing abortions, maternal or even fetal/infant safety. I ALSO understand that death is not the worst thing that can befall a person.. not by far.

The data I presented showed that VERY clearly. Because, in Holland, the nation with the lowest rate of abortions, they do have "at will" policies. AND... while I only cited Romania (because it is the most extreme case), the rates of abortions in places with heavy restrictions are NOT lower than those with more liberal policies.

What does make a difference is real and true education, which does NOT include "abstinence only" education. Real education reduces abortions and STDs both.

[Phatscotty]

yes, the results of that are promising...

Not like we all can't see what a failure those policies have been. I'm cool with abstinence as an option. Whatever the case, the one teaching health is going to twist it to their personal desires anyways.

[Juan_Bottom]

Many times flying in the face of the values the family is trying to teach their kids.

I've come to the conclusion as of late, that most people are not only unqualified to have children, but also that raising them wrong is socially acceptable. For example;
If I believe that the Earth is actually the giant egg of a cosmic flying snake, that doesn't give me the right to indoctrinate or teach a defenseless child that same nonsense. You should never deny a child "the facts" and you shouldn't teach them "what to think." You should teach them "how to think." That's what the schools are trying to do, teach them how to think.

Killing a 4 month old baby is outlawed, so killing a baby 4 months from birth should be as well.

That's not logic. Those are apples and oranges.

Because there is no definition of "life", no statistics are kept on whether a child already died prior to removal or not (unless the child is old enough to get a death certificate).

What I want to see, is some anti-abortion a-hole to actually go on tv, and say "this over here is what we rationally define as life worth giving a chance, and that over there is what we believe doesn't count. So this is where we draw the line."
Instead, the nutters ignore the science or even logic of their own arguments, and argue only about the potential of a baby, from their own self-righteous religious point of view.
But I want to know if they define embryonic cells as "human life." Or if they don't count because they have no nervous system. Is a cell a "human" once it begins to develop nerves? That is when a cell could hypothetically feel pain, right? Well, then they have to consider that the cell is still identical to say, the embryonic cell of a dog or lemur. Do Ape baby's county? Are they human if they share 98% of the same DNA as we do?
And what about In vitro fertilization? Lots of eggs and sperm are destroyed in the process (sometimes fertilized ones). Shouldn't they be protesting that too? Should those egg and sperm get funerals?


http://www.abortiontv.com/Misc/AbortionStatistics.htm

[Barramundi Dan]

I'm an Australian and I thank God for the fact the I live in a country that has a public health system. When it comes to health care most Australians are glad to pay a bit more tax to ensure that all our people have access to good medical treatment no matter what their financial state of affairs may be.
My father recently had major heart surgery. He was looked after well by our outstanding health professionals and has since made a full recovery. Oh and guess what? It did not cost him a cent. Our system is not perfect. No country's is but I'm proud of Australia for the way our people have voted out every political party that tried to move our health care system towards the American model.
Sure you may say that America has a great health care system but whats the point if a large proportion of its citizens don't have access to it.
The "every man for himself mentality" that seems to be so dominant in the american psych is holding back America from being a truley great nation.

[PLAYER57832]

I'm an Australian and I thank God for the fact the I live in a country that has a public health system. When it comes to health care most Australians are glad to pay a bit more tax to ensure that all our people have access to good medical treatment no matter what their financial state of affairs may be.
My father recently had major heart surgery. He was looked after well by our outstanding health professionals and has since made a full recovery. Oh and guess what? It did not cost him a cent. Our system is not perfect. No country's is but I'm proud of Australia for the way our people have voted out every political party that tried to move our health care system towards the American model.
Sure you may say that America has a great health care system but whats the point if a large proportion of its citizens don't have access to it.
The "every man for himself mentality" that seems to be so dominant in the american psych is holding back America from being a truly great nation.

Except, this isn't even about "every man for himself", because the truth is that socialized health care COSTS LESS. No, this is about a health insurance industry that wants huge profits and a bunch of right wingers who have decided its all about abortion.

Like Phattscotty, their universal attitude is "don't confuse me with facts.. I have my mind made up".

[jay_a2j]

Just voted down the Conservative line.

[PLAYER57832]

Just voted down the Conservative line.

No surprise there. The suprise for you will come when you see you get exactly what you asked for.. but that it's nothing at all like what you claimed you wanted.

[saxitoxin]

Oh and guess what? It did not cost him a cent.

Who paid for it?

[saxitoxin]

Just voted down the Conservative line.

No surprise there. The suprise for you will come when you see you get exactly what you asked for.. but that it's nothing at all like what you claimed you wanted.

[GreecePwns]

Voted Freedom Party for NY Governor (would've voted Green but their ballot access is pretty much guaranteed while Freedom is a tossup), Green wherever available and abstained from any two-party races.

[PLAYER57832]

Voted Freedom Party for NY Governor (would've voted Green but their ballot access is pretty much guaranteed while Freedom is a tossup), Green wherever available and abstained from any two-party races.

Would have voted green myself, but as you say, its a wasted vote. The green candidate, though, is the only one with anything close to a truly sensible agenda.

[GreecePwns]

Voted Freedom Party for NY Governor (would've voted Green but their ballot access is pretty much guaranteed while Freedom is a tossup), Green wherever available and abstained from any two-party races.

Would have voted green myself, but as you say, its a wasted vote. The green candidate, though, is the only one with anything close to a truly sensible agenda.

I'm hoping he keeps up with his promise to incorporate the some of the Freedom Party ideas for a single Left Green party. Once you look past the race-related language of the Freedom candidates both have very similar agendas.

In fact, the Rent is Too Damn High candidate had more of an agenda than Paladino did.

[saxitoxin]

Voted Freedom Party for NY Governor (would've voted Green but their ballot access is pretty much guaranteed while Freedom is a tossup), Green wherever available and abstained from any two-party races.

Would have voted green myself, but as you say, its a wasted vote. The green candidate, though, is the only one with anything close to a truly sensible agenda.

I'm hoping he keeps up with his promise to incorporate the some of the Freedom Party ideas for a single Left Green party. Once you look past the race-related language of the Freedom candidates both have very similar agendas.

I'm cool with any party that has a former Black Panther at its head. Barron speaks the truth when he said someone should have told the Democrat Party this was supposed to be a post-racial society. He's pretty brave, though, considering what the Democrats did to Nader in Pennsylvania after he upset their pro-corporate agenda (i.e. embezzling state money and using it to sue him to personal bankruptcy).

[GreecePwns]

And I, for one, can't wait until 2012 where I can cast my vote for Jello Biafra to be President (barring a Kucinich nomination, that is).

[Timminz]

And I, for one, can't wait until 2012 where I can cast my vote for Jello Biafra to be President (barring a Kucinich nomination, that is).

I would immigrate to the US, if it meant I could vote for Jello Biafra.

[PLAYER57832]

And I, for one, can't wait until 2012 where I can cast my vote for Jello Biafra to be President (barring a Kucinich nomination, that is).

I would immigrate to the US, if it meant I could vote for Jello Biafra.

Takes more than 2 years to become a citizen, unless you fit some "special circumstances".

[beezer]

Except, this isn't even about "every man for himself", because the truth is that socialized health care COSTS LESS.

[Juan_Bottom]

Why is that funny?