...and still the war against women continues by Niki2

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Speaking of which, who is paying for this mandated procedure? Are you planning on taking MY money and using it to pay for these medical procedures? Or are you planning on telling every pregnant woman that she MUST have such a procedure, and MUST pay for it out of her own pocket? I thought you used to have a problem with government telling people how and where to spend their money...

A woman comes in to a clinic, on her own, seeking to get a medical procedure. And no one is denying that 'right'. As part of the deal, she has to get a ultrasound. And pay for it. That's the price of doing business.

Don't like it ? Don't opt for the procedure.

Simple.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 31, 2011 4:13 AM

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

So by the same logic, you'd fully support a state law that said in order to buy a home, you are required by law to join a homeowners' association, and you are required by law to pay.

Right?

I mean, if you don't want to join, just don't buy a home.

Simple.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 31, 2011 4:43 AM

America loves a winner!

Don't buy a home 'there'.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 31, 2011 5:00 AM

HERO

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
I mean, if you don't want to join, just don't buy a home.

What if you get drunk at a party and the next morning wake up in bed with a real estate agent and a couple weeks later you find out your a homeowner?

Thats how I got my condo.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.
"I would rather not ignore your contributions." Niki2, 2010.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 31, 2011 7:35 AM

THEHAPPYTRADER

At what point should a woman's right to choose overrule a child's right to live? I don't think counciling and a 24 hour wait are unreasonable precautions when making the decision to end a fetus's life. It is kind of a big deal. However this mandatory ultrasound procedure sounds costly and unnecessary.

This has probably been said before, but you are unlikely to win over hearts and minds when you brand your opposition as 'sexist.' Is it sexist to be concerned about the fate of an unborn child? The fetus could be female too after all.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 31, 2011 7:44 AM

Magons: DT said "vaginal ultrasounds" are more risky as far as I can see, not that regular ultrasounds result in immediate child death or brain damage.

Kwicko: Um. Are we comparing sex to owning a house? Because I know some people put sex in the same hierarchy of needs as shelter, but that is just an entirely bizarre and foreign concept to me.

Not to say there aren't different kinds of shelter... You know what, I think maybe this thread just got too metaphorical for me.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 31, 2011 7:49 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Magons: DT said "vaginal ultrasounds" are more risky as far as I can see, not that regular ultrasounds result in immediate child death or brain damage.

Kwicko: Um. Are we comparing sex to owning a house? Because I know some people put sex in the same hierarchy of needs as shelter, but that is just an entirely bizarre and foreign concept to me.

No, we're comparing being forced to have a child because you can't afford a medical procedure to buying a home - another important and life-changing decision.

Hey, suppose that every man who ever wants Viagra be forced to undergo a full EKG and heart stress test before he's allowed to get Viagra. Oh, and he has to pay for all that out of pocket, and insurance will never be allowed to help pay for it.

Nobody really *NEEDS* Viagra, Cialis, or any of that crap, after all.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 31, 2011 7:59 AM

Quote:
Hey, suppose that every man who ever wants Viagra be forced to undergo a full EKG and heart stress test before he's allowed to get Viagra. Oh, and he has to pay for all that out of pocket, and insurance will never be allowed to help pay for it.

Nobody really *NEEDS* Viagra, Cialis, or any of that crap, after all.

Huh. Kwicko, I think you just invented a viable form of male birth control.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 31, 2011 8:49 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Magons: DT said "vaginal ultrasounds" are more risky as far as I can see, not that regular ultrasounds result in immediate child death or brain damage.

Kwicko: Um. Are we comparing sex to owning a house? Because I know some people put sex in the same hierarchy of needs as shelter, but that is just an entirely bizarre and foreign concept to me.

Not to say there aren't different kinds of shelter... You know what, I think maybe this thread just got too metaphorical for me.

Byte, Magon

Ultrasounds of the foetus damage the baby's brain and so whould be used sparingly. Longer exposure does more damage. This has been all over the news for years, it's hardly a controversial idea or even in the realm of theory. The waves break up the formation of new synapses. Anyone at all familiar with neurology would have predicted this anyway. The sensible thing is, use sparingly. Also, post ultrasound abortions are 75% females, so bear that in mind from a women's rights perspective.

Anyway, a simple google search returns hundreds of studies, here's the top searhc result I got:

http://www.naturalchild.org/research/yale_ultrasound.html

It's scientifically obvious. Probably a better imaging system is around the corner, but we really want to think about pre-natal gender identification and how that will effect gender ratios. I can tell you right now that in countries where women actually *are* a minority, women's rights are headed for zero. We were just talking about women as slaves in china. That's new. 20 years ago, women had close to equal rights. Now it's heavily backsliding, because china is becoming a male dominated society.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 31, 2011 8:54 AM

In other words, if you're going to FORCE women to get ultrasounds, you'd damned well better give them an abortion afterwards, since you've already fried the fetus's brain...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 31, 2011 9:12 AM

Ah. That does seem rather conclusive.

Well, I point again to what I said about politicians not understanding science. I doubt many people would support this new law if they knew about these consequences.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 31, 2011 10:30 AM

JONGSSTRAW

I feel that it's very wrong to force women to undergo bureaucratic delays prior to having an abortion. It's already been a difficult choice or a necessitated one for the mother, and it's ridiculous to believe that all the personal options haven't already been considered. Just give the gals what they want or need. Religious zealots step aside.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 31, 2011 11:34 AM

Mike,

Someone asked a scientific question. The effect is similar to being struck with an electrical current, the longer the exposure, the worse it gets. There are times when it's essential to do, but it shouldn't be done frivilously.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 31, 2011 11:50 AM

M52NICKERSON

DALEK!

I looked at the site you posted Dreamtrove, and did a search of my own. I only found a few studies in which many of the websites are referring to. Unfortunately I can't find the Yale Study itself. I'm skeptical of any findings that come from only a few studies, and more so of websites that referred to them.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 31, 2011 12:07 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:

Ultrasounds of the foetus damage the baby's brain and so whould be used sparingly. Longer exposure does more damage. This has been all over the news for years, it's hardly a controversial idea or even in the realm of theory. The waves break up the formation of new synapses. Anyone at all familiar with neurology would have predicted this anyway. The sensible thing is, use sparingly. Also, post ultrasound abortions are 75% females, so bear that in mind from a women's rights perspective.

Anyway, a simple google search returns hundreds of studies, here's the top searhc result I got:

http://www.naturalchild.org/research/yale_ultrasound.html

It's scientifically obvious. Probably a better imaging system is around the corner, but we really want to think about pre-natal gender identification and how that will effect gender ratios. I can tell you right now that in countries where women actually *are* a minority, women's rights are headed for zero. We were just talking about women as slaves in china. That's new. 20 years ago, women had close to equal rights. Now it's heavily backsliding, because china is becoming a male dominated society.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

Thanks for providing a link. I did a quick scan of some of the information available on the net. From what I can see, the meta research indicates 'just don't know' rather than any conclusive results, and that the best advice is unless you are in danger of having a high risk pregnancy, less is better. Makes sense. I don't particularly like the routine nature of ultrasounds for pregnancy these days, but they can be useful and sometimes save both mother and baby's lives. I can see that the research has been jumped on by natural medicine sites, but frankly some of the natural childbirth advocates are complete nutty and would have us, along with the anti abortion crowd, living back in the dark ages as far as pregnancy and childbirth are concerned. As someone pointed out not so long ago, pregnancy is a high risk activity. A hundred or so years ago, it was the highest cause of female deaths.

DT, you keep bringing up female infanticide. Can you show me any links to data which suggests ultrasounds are linked to aborting female fetuses in western countries?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 31, 2011 2:32 PM

Magon,

Not off hand, I'm not aware that it's a problem, I thought we were on abortion, internationally. No question the figures are much lower for any problems in most developed nations than in third world countries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex-selective_abortion

Wikipedia suggests that it's a probably in Korea if you count that as a western nation, but the real trouble spots are India and China. My off-hand guess would be that there would be a slight tendency, but that overall women who have ultrasounds in the US are not considering abortion.

Not sure why the feminist perspective would be western centric though. I see the benefits of ultrasound as neonatal care, but I also just wanted to point out the dangers. I suspect the studies that showed the brain damage risk might have been funded by feminists from the other side, worried about the gender imbalance in India/China which is translating into a threat to women's rights, but the idea of synaptic interruption through ultrasound is certainly scientifically sound. This is basically the klingon disrupter, and that's how it's used in medicine. As I said, better imaging will come along, but for now, I think it's safe if you just use it sparingly, and be aware of the risks.

The question about how much information is dangerous is always going to be one for society. I could certainly picture a Philip K. Dick style world in which parents know the whole lives of their children, and select to create football captains and cheerleaders, and perhaps the occasional nobel scientist, but without a world full of people whose work made those breakthroughs possible...

A couple I know just deliberately skipped the ultrasound so as not to know, and named the boy Ogden, and then had to change course when it was born a girl.

The boy bias is strange, but ingrained at some level. All our weird little quirks of humanity are in danger of coming out in chaotic and destructive ways if we fail to keep an eye on them ourselves. As technology advances, the impact of one random human nature glitch is just going to be multipled ad nauseum.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 31, 2011 3:12 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

I think DT may be mixing up ultrasound and MRI. Ultrasound uses sound waves, like sonar. MRI uses powerful shifting magnetic fields which MAY induce small wavelength short-distance currents in the body similar to how cell phones seem to kick up brain activity with their (electromagnetic) broadcasts.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 31, 2011 3:25 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
I think DT may be mixing up ultrasound and MRI. Ultrasound uses sound waves, like sonar. MRI uses powerful shifting magnetic fields which MAY induce small wavelength short-distance currents in the body similar to how cell phones seem to kick up brain activity with their (electromagnetic) broadcasts.

Kiki, the story was all over the place, I'm a little surprised everyone here didn't already know it, it was a couple years ago, but I just posted it. It had been suspected in epilepsy for year, but in the 90s and 2000s they started seriously studying it. The conclusion of the vibrations disrupting the formation of new synapses came at a time when my nephew was still in the womb, so I can really pinpoint it precisely.

I have no reason to believe that MRI would cause any synaptic damage.

I humbly suggest that people google things rather than ask me. I'm familiar with the subject, but google and wikipedia are sure to know far more than I do.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 31, 2011 3:41 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

This is the part where you went astray "the effect is similar to being struck with an electrical current". No, it's not.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 31, 2011 4:11 PM

Kiki

I mean in terms of the way in which synaptic connections are broken. Obviously a sound wave is not an electric current. The effect on the brain is similar. It's also similar to a small tumor in that regard. Synapses are the communicating part of the cell, often at the end of long protrusions like axons and dendrites, which is what enables cells to communicate even though they are not co-located. It's actually the protrusions themselves which tear under the stress of sympathetic vibration, which can be caused by a sound wave, or electrical current. A higher electrical current will actually constrict the fibrils holding the brain structure in place, pulling the synapses apart and ripping the dendrites et al. A tumor can do something similar: pushing the cells apart, causing the dendrites and axons to stretch and break apart, breaking the synaptic connection.

All of these methods will have similar effects on the brain structure and cognitive function. It's a bad idea to do it intentionally, which was meant really as health advice, not a political statement.

Politically, in asia, ultrasound is used to select out girls so people can have more boys, which I suspect is an evolutionary glitch: In a tribal society, successful boys would have more offspring than girls. For an entire society, the practice seems evolutionarily moronic, but I can see how it would evolve on a very small clan level, and find its way, by nature or nurture, into cultures. At any rate, it's important to recognize that people behave this way, and so not to encourage it.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 31, 2011 4:39 PM

The thing with technology in general is that it can often be put to bad use as well as good, generally however once the genie is out of the bottle, you can't stuff them back in.

While I find the idea of aborting a foetus on the basis of gender personally abhorrent, I don't see that blaming ultrasounds for this practice useful. And if the alternative is abandoning or killing female born babies, as probably was past practice, I'd say termination of a foetus was preferable. I'd support things that changed the mindset, rather than the technology which enables it, which is also, as I have stated earlier, useful technology, especially for women in the 'high risk pregnancy' category.

I've also had ultrasound for other medical conditions, administered by a physio and used differently, to promote healing. Quite a useful tool.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 31, 2011 4:50 PM

Magon, ultrasound has lots of useful applications, including neonatal care and identifying problem pregnancies. The problem with the comparison of selective abortion and female infanticide is that while you might be right on an anecdotal personal level, it fails on a statistical level. The gender imbalance society will and does oppress women, fairly radically, as in the reintroduction of female de facto slavery in China. Female infanticide was a problem, yes, but did not create this level of statistical imbalance. I see both as serious problems, but different ones.

Lots of technology is available but held at bay. A couple things that could be done to remove the damaage is use short bursts of ultrasound, or test different frequencies, maybe try not to hit the baby's brain, but certainly not keep the machine running for an hour at a time. Another one is a professional code of conduct that would not reveal the gender of the child.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 31, 2011 4:57 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Magon,

Not off hand, I'm not aware that it's a problem, I thought we were on abortion, internationally. No question the figures are much lower for any problems in most developed nations than in third world countries.

Oh, I thought we were talking about abortion in the US and I was just, as usually, confusing things by talking about Australia.

I think different experiences inform different opinions on this emotive issue. You come at it from what I consider a very unusual perspective, the eugenics angle, something I've not really encountered from many anti abortionists.

My family background is Catholic. You have to realise that in the past the Church controlled all elements of peoples lives, what they did, said, how they behaved, how they brought their families up. In many countries and cultures it still does. The mentality of the Church was that married couples had a duty to have children and lots of them. Preventing conception in any way was forbidden, although in later years they gave a nod to ineffective practises such as withdrawal and the rhythm method.

Q what do you call people who practise the rhythm method?
A Parents

That was a Catholic joke.

People were basically kept in the dark about a lot of things, not just Catholics. Sex, contraception, abortion *gasp horror* were pretty much forbidden subjects, or the information given about them was limited. It caused great unhappiness for a whole truck load of reasons, and basically people were kept ignorant and unable to make informed choices about how they could live their lives.

A few people here have asked about the mother vs the foetus in terms of importance, but you see for many years in the Western world, women were given lower priority than their unborn babies, or the potential life that they could produce. It didn't matter how poor, sick, or miserable you were, you just produced baby after baby, through either duty or ignorance. It wasn't unusual in history for a woman to die in childbirth and her child survive, through choices made by her husband!! Women were really just seen as brainless breeding machines. Some of those kind of ways of thinking still exist in the countries that practise female infanticide.

The eugenics movement was born out of that kind of world. It saw the misery that the poor were in and thought it had solutions. Unfortunately, it missed a vital one, the one of offering choice to people and instead taking it away from them once again.

It's that important concept of choice that leads me to my stance on abortion, even if I find the reasons that people sometimes have them unethical or immoral, I still believe in choice. And yes, I value the choices of the born over the existence of the unborn, and while I often feel qualms about that, that is, I believe the most humane way of living.

I hope this explains why I feel the way I do, and why I choose to keep discussing this issue even when it divides people. It feels to me that removal of choice is moving us backwards to a time when choice was not available.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, July 31, 2011 5:03 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:

Lots of technology is available but held at bay. A couple things that could be done to remove the damaage is use short bursts of ultrasound, or test different frequencies, maybe try not to hit the baby's brain, but certainly not keep the machine running for an hour at a time. Another one is a professional code of conduct that would not reveal the gender of the child.

Eh, I've never seen it used like that. Never an hour at a time, more like 5 to 10 minutes and never static. Vaginal ultasounds can last even less time, mainly because they are damned uncomfortable, and mainly because they usually are only used to detect heartbeat in very early embryos/foetuses.

If you claim that ultrasound led to mental retardation then everybody I know should have mentally retarded children. The truth is that a lot of us have very smart children ;) I guess all medical procedures carry a risk, but ultrasounds have less than amniocentesis and other more intrusive prenatal testing.

And again, I'd reiterate, don't blame the technology, blame the ideology. If you restrict medical testing because it might contribute to abortion rate, YOU are once again making the choice on behalf of others based upon what YOU see as right.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 1, 2011 11:21 AM

America loves a winner!

One of the groups I really enjoyed , 10,000 Maniacs, had a song - What's the matter here

One line, in particular, has a significant message...

I'm tired of the excuses everybody uses, he's your kid, do as you see fit,
but get this through that I don't approve of what you did to you own flesh and blood.

The song, for those who don't know, is about child abuse.

Is not abortion a form of child abuse ?

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 1, 2011 12:53 PM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Hee, hee, hee; Hero, I love it! How about what if your scenario has added to it that the real estate agent comes around to tell you she's pregnant and gonna dun you for child support for the rest of your life unless she can get an abortion? Would you go watch the ultrasound and listen to the fetus and gory details told you by the doctor so that she could have the abortion (while she puts her earphones on and listens to her iPod?).

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 1, 2011 12:54 PM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Happy, IF counseling wasn't a ploy by which to try and horrify/guiltify the woman not to have an abortion, no problem. It is. There's nothing wrong with a 24-hour waiting period and counseling, but that's not the INTENT. That's the issue. And it's not sexist if it's necessary, but it's not; it's a deliberate effort to try and enforce things that will make abortion less possible.

How about the one where a doctor can't be sued if a woman's child ends up having horrible conditions that will break the woman/parents to care for and the doctor chose not to tell them? How about where a woman's life might be jeopardized by pregnancy and the doctor refuses to tell her, and he can't be held accountable? Both exist now, you know. Until someone tells me they're willing to adopt the child in the first example, they have nothing to say to me.

It's not about the health of the child, period. It absolutely isn't.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 1, 2011 12:55 PM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Hey Mike, here's one: What if every male who wants a vascetomy were forced by law to see a gory movie about abortions, hear all the details, see an ultrasound complete with sounds of a fetal heartbeat, wait 24 hours, drive 500 miles and then come BACK 500 miles before they could get it? I think that's just as fair as doing it to a woman... Of course, aside from the inconvenience, there's a lot of men who wouldn't care about the rest...

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 1, 2011 12:56 PM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
I feel that it's very wrong to force women to undergo bureaucratic delays prior to having an abortion. It's already been a difficult choice or a necessitated one for the mother, and it's ridiculous to believe that all the personal options haven't already been considered. Just give the gals what they want or need. Religious zealots step aside.

AMEN JS, you nailed it in a nutshell (excuse the mix of metaphors).

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 3, 2011 3:27 AM

JAMERON4EVA

In the pro-life vs. pro-choice, im in the middle, cuz while it's bullshit to force a law that invades privacy on someone, it's also fucking bull shit to think it's all of a sudden alright to kill a life. Abortion is no different an act then that of in China, and like the Casey Anthony case, it's still murder. But thats where i differ from N.C. cuz women shouldn't be forced to do this ^^ crap. It violates females rights under a little tiny thing called the Constitution. Remember im a republican saying this. I dont agree with abortions, and i dont really think there is any excuse, but to force a law thats so assinine it makes my point that polititons are idiots that much stronger. Then again, we are under the Obama admin, which has gotten more soldiers killed in 2-3 years than the Bush admin did in a near decade.

"Mom, he has her chip. He has her."
John Connor,"Born To Run", TSCC EP 2x22

"We mustn't over stimulate young minds. Das ist verboten!" - Rappy

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 3, 2011 3:50 AM

I agree with most of that. A look on wikipedia suggests the last part is accurate, however I'm not sure the only factors are who the president is, as neither president was particularly gifted in military strategy. Rather, I'd suggest that increasing casualties may be the result of having worn out our welcome, and having increased the regional coverage of our forces instead of staying within Kabul.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 3, 2011 5:51 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Hey, a reasonable (so far), rational Republican! Worth your weight in gold, if you continue to be civil (sorry, just so few ARE, and I don't remember you very well). Welcome back.

I like your logic about abortion; I can't imagine ANYONE who actually likes it or does it easily, on that I think you'll find anyone with any sanity in agreement. But what the RTLers are doing is disgusting...if it was done to THEM on some other issue, they'd scream bloody murder. You can't force through laws how people think; If you can't convince someone of something, laws won't change them.

I don't think I'd correlate it with China, if you mean where they put girl babies out on hillsides to die. If it's to that which you are referring, I think they're QUITE different. It takes a long time for a baby to die of exposure/hunger/whatever.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 3, 2011 7:26 AM

M52NICKERSON

DALEK!

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Is not abortion a form of child abuse ?

No, it is a fetus until born. That is why we don't allow post birth abortions.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 3, 2011 7:26 AM

M52NICKERSON

DALEK!

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Is not abortion a form of child abuse ?

No, it is a fetus until born. That is why we don't allow post birth abortions.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 3, 2011 11:57 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

Is not abortion a form of child abuse ?

Do you bury fetuses if there has been miscarraiage? Have a funeral service? Headstone?

Actually you might, depending on the stage of the pregnancy. I knew someone who lost pregnancy at 6mths who did that - but it doesn't happen pre 3 - most miscarried fetues end up down the loo or disposed of with hospital waste. Mostly people will not even mention the loss to others. NOt the way we treat 'born' humans. Because we recognise there is a diiference.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 3, 2011 12:42 PM

TRAVELER

If you're against abortion, then fight abortion. Don't pass laws that pretend to give a woman options when all these laws are doing are depriving a woman of her civil rights.

http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=28764731
Traveler

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 4, 2011 9:06 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
Don't pass laws that pretend to give a woman options when all these laws are doing are depriving a woman of her civil rights.

Amen.

Unfortunately, it's something they've learned; the law will never be changed (gawd willing), so they can't outlaw it. The next best thing (along with harassing doctors and clinics and killing doctors who provide it) is to remove financing and then pass laws that make it as difficult as humanly possible to GET one. So much for smaller government...

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 4, 2011 11:03 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

Is not abortion a form of child abuse ?

Do you bury fetuses if there has been miscarraiage? Have a funeral service? Headstone?

Actually you might, depending on the stage of the pregnancy. I knew someone who lost pregnancy at 6mths who did that - but it doesn't happen pre 3 - most miscarried fetues end up down the loo or disposed of with hospital waste. Mostly people will not even mention the loss to others. NOt the way we treat 'born' humans. Because we recognise there is a diiference.

Miscarriages aren't really part of the discussion, as they're not actions of intent.

I used the 10,000 Maniacs song for a few reasons. Not only do the words - " I'm tired of the excuses everybody uses, it's your child, do as you see fit " apply to child abuse, but can also apply to the 'excuse' of it being a woman's body, so she can do pretty much anything she wants, as well.

Which I find doubly powerful, because Natalie Merchant , to the best of my knowledge, is far from a TEA party / Pro- Lifer type. ( Hey, cool if she is, but I've not seen her at any rallies ) She seems to be in tight w/ Michael Stipe (REM) and more of a Lilith Fair sort.

Plus, I really like the song, aside from the social commentary.

Also... " I don't approve of what you did to your own flesh and blood ".

Tell me how that can't also a commentary on both child abuse as well as abortion.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 4, 2011 12:20 PM

Quote:
but can also apply to the 'excuse' of it being a woman's body, so she can do pretty much anything she wants

I do not think you meant what you just said.

Broaden this to men and women and consider the issue of suicide a parallel.

Now, you and I will probably agree that a suicide is pretty tragic, and I'm pretty sure it's a crime under law. The comparison with abortion is that in both cases, someone dies, which society in general likes to discourage. But they are not one-hundred percent similar, as I imagine all of us have some familiarity with the concept of a mercy death for someone in extreme pain, in which case we would still find suicide tragic, but perhaps understandable.

Clearly, the issue you have between suicide and abortion isn't that someone is doing harm to their own body, but rather that a woman is doing harm to an unborn fetus/child/whatever.

So saying that you don't believe a person has a choice what to do with their own body is an incorrect way of phrasing what it is you believe. It also sets you up for people misinterpreting you. I think perhaps you should choose your words better to better get across your meaning.

Unless, of course, you really DID just mean that women should have no choice in what happens to their body... In which case I will inform the governor that we should remove rape as a crime from the books.

This is why I think a valid point of research would be to find a way to preserve the life of the fetus after it has been removed, perhaps through artificial wombs or some kind of transplant surrogacy. The later, BTW, has happened, though the success rate is still too low for it to be a really viable alternative.

The women does have a choice in her body, and I think eventually we can get to a point where it doesn't mean infringing on any "rights" for her unborn child.

Until then, I am not for or against, just as when two soldiers meet on the battlefield in a struggle for their life or livelyhood, I don't blame one or the other, but I do blame the mechanisms which pit the two against each other in that manner.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 4, 2011 12:29 PM

America loves a winner!

Byte - you're extrapolating far and away off the topic here.

And, taking my entire sentence in context, not just 1/2 of it, is EXACTLY what I meant to say.

The song, to which I refer, speaks of child abuse. Not suicide.

The words from the song, and the video, speak for themselves.

I invite you to watch it, if you've not done so already. And if you have, then watch it again.

It's a good song.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 4, 2011 12:31 PM

I'm saying that I really doubt that you meant what you said in that particular instance because even IN context it's loaded with unfortunate implications that I'm almost sure you didn't intend.

I know that you don't support rape. This is obvious. But you weren't being clear, so I clarified for you.

The suicide was just an analogy to show WHY it's obvious you don't mean it that way.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 4, 2011 12:47 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
I'm saying that I really doubt that you meant what you said in that particular instance because even IN context it's loaded with unfortunate implications that I'm almost sure you didn't intend.

I know that you don't support rape. This is obvious. But you weren't being clear, so I clarified for you.

The suicide was just an analogy to show WHY it's obvious you don't mean it that way.

Rape, suicide are nothing but straw men in this discussion.

A woman ( or a man ) beating a child, because it belongs to her/ him, is pretty darn close to a mother aborting her child. It's her body, her own 'flesh and blood', as it were.

My previous position on the matter of abortion, that a woman has full rights and domain of her body, but gradually gives up those rights to the unborn as it grows, has been posted here before. I don't feel the need to continuously re-post my views, every time someone wants to misrepresent my comments.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 4, 2011 12:52 PM

Apparently you don't understand my intentions. Very well. Your comments may stand without clarification if you wish.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 4, 2011 1:25 PM

Quote:
Posted by Some Moron:

Then again, we are under the Obama admin, which has gotten more soldiers killed in 2-3 years than the Bush admin did in a near decade.

Seriously, dude? Really?

Post up your numbers. I call.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 4, 2011 1:31 PM

Rappy doesn't believe people have freedom to make health choices regarding their own bodies?

How very libertarian of him. I'm shocked.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 4, 2011 1:42 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
Posted by Some Moron:

Then again, we are under the Obama admin, which has gotten more soldiers killed in 2-3 years than the Bush admin did in a near decade.

Seriously, dude? Really?

Post up your numbers. I call.

He's actually right if you just look at Afghanistan.

I haven't yet tried to factor in Iraq yet though. I found a graphic, but it doesn't go past 2008 for the comparison. About 4,000 soldier deaths in Iraq though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Forces_casualties_in_the_wa
r_in_Afghanistan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War#U.S._armed_for
ces

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 4, 2011 1:49 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Rappy doesn't believe people have freedom to make health choices regarding their own bodies?

How very libertarian of him. I'm shocked.

And Kwickie can't pass reading comprehension 101.

I stated the exact opposite of what he claims I believe.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 4, 2011 2:07 PM