Women's Rights

[PLAYER57832]

That said, proper discussion includes more than just "don't have sex before marriage", it includes discussion of STDs, contraceptives, pregnancy issues, etc, as well as other issues (puberty, etc.) and, while a public education does not teach morals per se, it should include a realistic discussion of consequences, and some basic talk of various views in society. Lest someone mention it, I homosexuality/transgender identities should be mentioned because they are now part of the societal discussion.

I think that "sex education" (I prefer reproductive education) needs to have three components. It must be age / developmental level appropriate. It must be based on rational thought and science. It must not insert a political or moral agenda.

Armed with proper information I would also tend to lean to a "just say no" approach. The reason is a bit more complex; full frontal lobe development doesn't occur into well into college years. That means there is a greater chance to "act on impulses." Would "just say no" be 100% effective, probably not, but probably more effective than always remembering to carry a condom on the chance you do act on that impulse.

Proper sex education has that as its background. The real problem is that a large segment of society does not agree. I have a neighbor who basically encouraged her daughter to get pregnant. (children and youth were involved). Others don't overtly say that, but act in well, a manner that makes it no surprise when their daughters get pregnant. In those cases, ironically enough, abortion is not an issue because they just have the kids. The real abortion problem comes with the segment of girls who just really don't believe they can get pregnant -- at all, the first time, etc, etc. Proper sex education cannot prevent all of that, but it does go a long way. Its like anything else. If you give teens a chance to really hear and discuss the facts, including the temptations, etc., then it works. This is not opinion, teen pregnancy rates do go down where there is appropriate sex education.

There is also a tremendous gray area in some subjects that might have a moral implication to them. Masturbation would be one of them. It gets more complex because of the complex nature of education and child molestation prevention. If done, it needs to be based on the above criteria.

Those are really 2 different issues. Issues like masturbation and even homosexuality are just mentioned as things that can happen, that these urges/activities do not make you insane, etc. Its up to the parents and churches to give moral guidance, but schools need to distinguish fact from opinion. In my class, this was handled by having students pick their own topics for a complete research paper. Some kids chose those topics, gave the reports. The teacher made sure the facts presented were accurate, put limits on the kinds of photos that could be brought and other general guidelines.

I learned a lot from the primitive sex education class at my public elementary school (6th grade). I needed permission to also watch the video for the girls, accompanied by my father who insisted that the film for the girls was more informative than the one for the boys.

We did not have that option, but there were many opportunities for both boys and girls.. it began with the very basics about puberty and then, later into more details until we basically had the full rough idea around 7th grade or so. As freshmen, we got the more complete story. Unfortunately, that timeline has to be moved up in many locals.

Molestation issues are dealt with beginning in preschool, protect your body/its private, etc, etc. They don't need details, they just need to know these areas are private and adults trying to see them other than specific instances ( doctors, etc.) are just not OK.

[ConfederateSS]

-----They are friends of my daughters and nieces. No they don't make more than min. wage. They don't pay their bills. They move from apt. to apt. when forced to leave. Things happen,people have kids. But things like 2 kids,having a kid happens. It has taken place throughout history. The problem is in today's America. They will have one kid. Which is sorta O.K.,things happen. But do they learn from it, no!!!! You think the problem of raising one kid,would make them think twice on having more. Until they straighten out their lives. NOPE! They rely on the hearts of others and the government. Soon that well runs dry.
-----One of them worked at a bar by The Detroit Tigers. On Opening Day she dropped her kids off at her Aunt and Uncle's. Could they babysit. The game ended. The aunt and uncle never thought much at 4 ,5, 6 o'clock. It's a bar. Come midnight,they call the bar. It turns out she never came in. The girl left the state ,abandoned the kids at her family's house. Isn't that just an American thing to do.
-----The aunt and uncle held out for 5 months. The uncle said ,"I can't raise them. Our own kids are grown up, have their own lives. I'll be 70 when they graduate High School." They turned the kids over to the state. The girl is being hunted by Social Services. I assume the police as well. I don't know if it's a crime to abandon kids with your family. God Bless America ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion).

[PLAYER57832]

The girl left the state ,abandoned the kids at her family's house. Isn't that just an American thing to do.

Of course not, but being American doesn't automatically make you a responsible person and citizen, either.

I don't know if it's a crime to abandon kids with your family.

of course it is, though if, as you state above she is a girl and not a grown woman, then some other people might be partially responsible as well.
But...
The question here is would you rather she had an abortion? Some people above would say absolutely not.

[ConfederateSS]

-----Americans have been raised in a party like atmosphere. America has welfare. Much like Ancient Rome. I'm sure single moms having kids happens in other G8 nations. Do they have welfare as well? Are they raised in a money society? Disney telling every kid, you can be anything doesn't help either. If you read one post back. They are in their 20's. But with America having no family structure over the past few decades. HERE WE ARE.
-----Do I think she should have had an abortion the first time. Maybe not. Should she have talked to someone,YES. Mistakes happen,we learn and move on. Well we used to anyway. After their first kid. They could have gotten their lives together. They might have thought about an abortion or getting their tubes tied. Nope, just ignore events and have more kids is today's America. I guess as she is concerned. She just stepped out of the frying pan and into the fire.
-----Are you asking me is she a bad person. No. I think she never learned how to be an adult. She panicked and is running scared. ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion).

[Bernie Sanders]

-----Americans have been raised in a party like atmosphere. America has welfare. Much like Ancient Rome. I'm sure single moms having kids happens in other G8 nations. Do they have welfare as well? Are they raised in a money society? Disney telling every kid, you can be anything doesn't help either. If you read one post back. They are in their 20's. But with America having no family structure over the past few decades. HERE WE ARE.
-----Do I think she should have had an abortion the first time. Maybe not. Should she have talked to someone,YES. Mistakes happen,we learn and move on. Well we used to anyway. After their first kid. They could have gotten their lives together. They might have thought about an abortion or getting their tubes tied. Nope, just ignore events and have more kids is today's America. I guess as she is concerned. She just stepped out of the frying pan and into the fire.
-----Are you asking me is she a bad person. No. I think she never learned how to be an adult. She panicked and is running scared. ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion).

Still having a hard time trying to understand a guy, who loves a treasonous flag, yet calls himself an American.

[/]

The Declaration states that "men" are created equal, this could mean a many number of things without context.

You seemed to have skipped over the "created" part.

Although this word has precedent as being gender neutral, it generally has no precedent as being age neutral.

Then when is "man" created ... from the 18th century use of the word. When does the "creator" give these rights which cannot be given away. What is the magic age that Jefferson had in mind? Can you freely kill any child then?

This is not a question of "legal" rights but "inalienable" rights. Is it perfect? Well, even Jefferson owned slaves. Theory and practice didn't work together then and it rarely works together now.

What is life?
What is liberty?
What is property (omitted by Jefferson because it was starting to be associated with slave ownership but a part of the ideals of the Enlightenment Thinkers)?
What is the pursuit of happiness?

That there exists exceptions to the practice does not make the theory invalid and the theory states "created" and that they are "endowed."

Fair enough. Personally I believe a knife is not created as the ores exits a dying star, nor when the ore is lifted from the earth, or even when it enters a forge; I believe things have to have certain traits before they can be considered a new thing, for example in a knife's case; being sharp. When you talk about the moment of conception, you are talking about what is literally a single celled organism. It is no more a person than a pine seed is a tree in the absence of soil.

If you want to know when I think flesh becomes man, then let's talk about traits.
http://www.ehd.org/science_main.php?level=i

It takes 6 to 7 Weeks for even the most rudimentary brainwave function to begin. I would say at the absolute very least a person needs to have brainwaves to be considered a living person. A brain-dead person is not considered by experts to even be alive.

At 17 weeks (which coincides near quickening, which signifies the most common current term legal limit for abortions within the US) the cerebral cortex becomes active. Can a being be considered a person in any meaningful way without this? A human can technically survive the destruction of their frontal lobe, but without it they have no thoughts, no concept of memory, no emotions, no voluntary motion (freedom). Can a human even continue to be a "person" without even holding a concept of happiness or pain, much less pursue it?

There's my opinion, a person is "created" upon the growth of specific traits, and ceases to be so after their loss.

[tzor]

Proper sex education has that as its background. The real problem is that a large segment of society does not agree.

First of all I think that a "large segment of society" is disengaged as to the actual educational process (mostly as a result of living out overly stressed schedules that often require a lot of extra-curricula activities for those very children) and when they do they often get one sided presentations about a particular program that might have 70% good things and 30% bad things.

People often forget the important role of the "casual observer." If you can't explain something to a casual observer, you might not have the complete grasp of that something you claim that you know well. Many education programs are not so well known and not so well explained. Their minor flaws appear as mountains and the inability to adapt to these concerns only makes the matter worse.

There is also a tremendous gray area in some subjects that might have a moral implication to them. Masturbation would be one of them. It gets more complex because of the complex nature of education and child molestation prevention. If done, it needs to be based on the above criteria.

Those are really 2 different issues. Issues like masturbation and even homosexuality are just mentioned as things that can happen, that these urges/activities do not make you insane, etc.

But context is always important here. Why are some things mentioned and other things not mentioned? This becomes a complex problem because children "learn" both the text and the context of what is being taught. Once again, if we consider the question of "reproductive education" then we can and must separate the process of reproduction from the pleasurable side effects of reproduction.

So let's switch gears for a moment and talk instead about "digestive education." There are all sorts of deviant variations of the normal digestive cycle which is based on the "pleasure" of eating. This would include the deliberate attempt to introduce hostile chemicals into the mouth in order to produce an endorphin response. (This is commonly called "eating spicy foods.") Now there is no moral aspect to this problem, and indeed it's not a "problem" but the question of "just mentioning" them in terms of "digestive education" tends to give the improper assumption that the purpose of digestion is pleasure, before and absorption of nutrients into the body. It can become an incorrect context "cart before the horse" problem.

Likewise, consider the mention of "artificial sweeteners" all without a full understanding of the problem at large. These are designed to tell the tongue "concentrated energy molecules" are being sent down, which the brain then relays to the stomach. The stomach in turn, not detecting the actual energy molecules doesn't send the hormonal signal to the brain that "stomach is full." This ironically encourages overeating and actually causes weight gain.

While this is not identical to the problem of reproductive education, it does show that mere "mentioning" can do more harm than good. This is not to say that it should not be taught, but it needs to be taught in terms of the proper educational context. Between no knowledge, and knowledge is "a little knowledge" which can be a dangerous thing.

Note that I have not included morality in either of the two topics. There is a moral element which mostly belongs to the religious sphere. (I do think a modicum of morality needs to be taught in public schools, in as much as society in general needs a modicum of morality in order to function and even a school needs a modicum of morality to function ... like NO CHEATING ON THE EXAMS.)

Molestation issues are dealt with beginning in preschool, protect your body/its private, etc, etc. They don't need details, they just need to know these areas are private and adults trying to see them other than specific instances ( doctors, etc.) are just not OK.

It's a little more complex than that. I had to take a special online course as a Grand Knight for the Knights of Columbus because I could be in charge of leaders of a youth offshoot of the Knights. (They are called the "Squires" / "Squirettes" programs; fortunately my council doesn't have them.) Molestation isn't just a matter of adult / child. Child / child molestation is also a problem as well. It's not just genital touching that one has to be worried and concerned about. It's not an impossible hurdle but it does complicate the issue if you want to do this properly. And it's more than just "molestation." There are many wolves in sheep clothing that are trying to insert agendas into the curriculum.

[tzor]

Still having a hard time trying to understand a guy, who loves a treasonous flag, yet calls himself an American.

It's OK Bernie. Everyone has their limitations.

I mean you call yourself an American, right? (At least I think you do.)

It's OK, I UNDERSTAND. I disagree, but I understand.

[ConfederateSS]

------It is AN AMERICAN FLAG, just not the one of Hatred your used to. The Stars and Stripes ... The one with Native American,Mexican, African American blood on it. You must be real proud of a Flag that. Took half of Mexico. Committed mass genocide on a race of people. The first American Flag of slavery. Not to mention the only one to bring slaves over on ships. USA...USA... I also watched my father who defended it. Fight in Korea and Vietnam. Come home and have...USA AMERICANS...BOO...and throw rotten tomatoes,eggs and spit on him. Outside of my mother dying. It's the only time I seen the look of disappointment on his face. In the car ride home...A few tears as well.
------A Dem. Socialist. HA!..Hitler ,Stalin...you're following in the footsteps of greatness. ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion).

[PLAYER57832]

Proper sex education has that as its background. The real problem is that a large segment of society does not agree.

First of all I think that a "large segment of society" is disengaged as to the actual educational process (mostly as a result of living out overly stressed schedules that often require a lot of extra-curricula activities for those very children) and when they do they often get one sided presentations about a particular program that might have 70% good things and 30% bad things.

If you are suggesting this is me, you are extremely misinformed!

People often forget the important role of the "casual observer." If you can't explain something to a casual observer, you might not have the complete grasp of that something you claim that you know well. Many education programs are not so well known and not so well explained. Their minor flaws appear as mountains and the inability to adapt to these concerns only makes the matter worse.

Again, this has nothing to do with my comments. It is why I am involved in this issue... because the information you are putting forward is simply not correct, and yes, I HAVE done the research, the science-based, non-opinion, definitely outside the Roman Catholic Church doctrine research.

process of reproduction from the pleasurable side effects of reproduction.

Absolutely not, because the pleasurable sensations are very much a part of sex and what it entails. Claiming otherwise is telling untruths. In fact, that pleasure is actually all the more reason to let kids know that these urges are very powerful, not something that you can just dismiss casually. Pretending otherwise leads kids to think that they are feeling things outside the norm and fails to arm them with the full tools they need to make real decisions, rather than just reacting.

So let's switch gears for a moment and talk instead about "digestive education." There are all sorts of deviant variations of the normal digestive cycle which is based on the "pleasure" of eating. This would include the deliberate attempt to introduce hostile chemicals into the mouth in order to produce an endorphin response. (This is commonly called "eating spicy foods.") Now there is no moral aspect to this problem, and indeed it's not a "problem" but the question of "just mentioning" them in terms of "digestive education" tends to give the improper assumption that the purpose of digestion is pleasure, before and absorption of nutrients into the body. It can become an incorrect context "cart before the horse" problem.

Likewise, consider the mention of "artificial sweeteners" all without a full understanding of the problem at large. These are designed to tell the tongue "concentrated energy molecules" are being sent down, which the brain then relays to the stomach. The stomach in turn, not detecting the actual energy molecules doesn't send the hormonal signal to the brain that "stomach is full." This ironically encourages overeating and actually causes weight gain.

While this is not identical to the problem of reproductive education, it does show that mere "mentioning" can do more harm than good. This is not to say that it should not be taught, but it needs to be taught in terms of the proper educational context. Between no knowledge, and knowledge is "a little knowledge" which can be a dangerous thing.

No, not even close. this opinion, although sounds quite reasonable, is in no way based on fact.

The FACTS are that sex education reduces the chance that teens, particularly younger teens engage in sex, as well as reduces the chance that they will become pregnant if they do engage in sex as under age teens. Of course, as these teens reach the age of majority, then sex becomes far more an issue of personal values. The point then is that they know the consequences, and have the ability to make appropriate decisions accordingly. (in other words, a pregnant 19 year old is hardly the same as a pregnant 16 year old, though a 19 year old is still technically a teenager)

Note that I have not included morality in either of the two topics. There is a moral element which mostly belongs to the religious sphere. (I do think a modicum of morality needs to be taught in public schools, in as much as society in general needs a modicum of morality in order to function and even a school needs a modicum of morality to function ... like NO CHEATING ON THE EXAMS.)

I have, because just like cheating, in this case there are very real and tangible problems with younger teens engaging in sex. Even older teen sex has risks that must be considered, but as noted above, a pregnancy at age 16 is pretty universally negative in our society, but pregnancy at 19 is not.

Molestation issues are dealt with beginning in preschool, protect your body/its private, etc, etc. They don't need details, they just need to know these areas are private and adults trying to see them other than specific instances ( doctors, etc.) are just not OK.

It's a little more complex than that. .[/quote]Uh, yeah.. I am not giving a full rundown here. My point was that molestation education and sex education are distinct.

And.. sorry, but my expertise in this are well exceeds your Knights of Columbus training. (as former cub leader for a Roman Catholic sponsored Pack, I had to take a very similar class, but I also have had a lot of other training)


And.. while you have brought up a lot of opinion about my comments, I am still waiting for the facts to back up your prior comments about abortion.

[tzor]

If you are suggesting this is me, you are extremely misinformed!

No I don't think I was, actually. We may disagree on things, but I've always found you very informed.

Again, this has nothing to do with my comments. It is why I am involved in this issue... because the information you are putting forward is simply not correct, and yes, I HAVE done the research, the science-based, non-opinion, definitely outside the Roman Catholic Church doctrine research.

What "information" have I brought in the field of reproductive education is incorrect?

process of reproduction from the pleasurable side effects of reproduction.

Absolutely not, because the pleasurable sensations are very much a part of sex and what it entails.

It's also true for digestion, and ironically enough exercise. Why emphasize and link it in one biological function but not the other?

In fact, that pleasure is actually all the more reason to let kids know that these urges are very powerful, not something that you can just dismiss casually. Pretending otherwise leads kids to think that they are feeling things outside the norm and fails to arm them with the full tools they need to make real decisions, rather than just reacting.

Did you just morph from "pleasure" to "urges?" You have also switched from the wonderful world or reproduction to the wonderful world of hormone induced puberty, which I think should be covered, but not through a "pleasure" angle.

The FACTS are that sex education reduces the chance that teens, particularly younger teens engage in sex, as well as reduces the chance that they will become pregnant if they do engage in sex as under age teens. Of course, as these teens reach the age of majority, then sex becomes far more an issue of personal values. The point then is that they know the consequences, and have the ability to make appropriate decisions accordingly. (in other words, a pregnant 19 year old is hardly the same as a pregnant 16 year old, though a 19 year old is still technically a teenager)

The "Facts" well it's time to whip out the old Google and find these "facts." Perhaps Oxford might be suitable? I mean it's not some far left/right place.

show

If you have studies that conclude otherwise, post them please.

And.. while you have brought up a lot of opinion about my comments, I am still waiting for the facts to back up your prior comments about abortion.

Which comments?
The overall sloppiness of many abortion facilities? Check out Operation Rescue
Did I comment on the fact that Planned Parenthood gives out Condoms most likely to fail? Perhaps I should.

[PLAYER57832]

What "information" have I brought in the field of reproductive education is incorrect? .... [rest of post omitted]

I started to quick answer, but your questions/post really deserve more attention than I can give right now. I will answer when I have a chance, but it might be a few days.

[tzor]

What "information" have I brought in the field of reproductive education is incorrect? .... [rest of post omitted]

I started to quick answer, but your questions/post really deserve more attention than I can give right now. I will answer when I have a chance, but it might be a few days.

OK I'll wait. I have a feeling we may be misunderstanding each other.

[PLAYER57832]

What "information" have I brought in the field of reproductive education is incorrect? .... [rest of post omitted]

I started to quick answer, but your questions/post really deserve more attention than I can give right now. I will answer when I have a chance, but it might be a few days.

OK I'll wait. I have a feeling we may be misunderstanding each other.

Yes, and maybe rather than just answering, I should just ask you to restate your position on abortion and maybe sex education, perhaps even in another thread. Don't rush too much on that, though, since I likely not going to have much real time until after Thanksgiving, just to let you know. I am popping back briefly to play ladder challenge games, relax while drinking a cup of coffee, but really busy at home now.

[tzor]

While I am working on a more extensive argument, I would like to ring up this article about something that will be appearing in the Supreme Court. Are Safety Requirements at Abortion Clinics Now Undue Burdens?

Last year, Lakisha Wilson, 22, received an abortion at a clinic in Ohio during which she bled profusely and went into shock. She subsequently suffered cardiac arrest and fatal brain damage from lack of oxygen.

Ms. Wilson’s abortion was performed on the third floor of a building with only a small elevator to provide access for a gurney. That elevator malfunctioned on the day Ms. Wilson suffered her complications, delaying the arrival of emergency medical technicians. When the EMTs finally reached her, they allegedly found Ms. Wilson with a pediatric oxygen mask, not a full adult mask, strapped to her face. Her IV had apparently been pulled out accidentally in the cramped surgical room.

The medics were unable to provide full emergency treatment for Ms. Wilson in the operating room, such as intubation, because to do so would have required that she lie flat on the gurney. The building’s elevator, however, was too small to accommodate a flat gurney. Care had to be delayed until Ms. Wilson reached the lobby.

Mrs. Mongar’s slim chances of survival were seriously hampered because it was exceedingly difficult for responders to get her to the waiting ambulance. The emergency exit was locked. Gosnell sent Ashley to the front desk to look for the key, but she could not find it. Ashley told us that a firefighter needed to cut the lock, but “It took him awhile … because the locks is old.” She testified that it took “twenty minutes, probably trying to get the locks unlocked….After cutting the locks, responders had to waste precious more minutes trying to maneuver through the narrow cramped hallways that could not accommodate a stretcher.

The concern of those who spend their lives terminating unborn babies’ lives is not the health or well-being of women who have abortions – it’s making sure that a steady stream of patients go through their doors as quickly and inexpensively as possible so as to maximize profits.

Getting back to Women's Rights: Cognitive dissonance blinds many people who support a so called "woman's right" to abortion will fail to see that the entire "industry" in the United States is designed for the continued employment of the members through increasing demand and cutting operating costs. These same people, who operate with the same morality of those who were employed in the Tobacco industry, only see those women as sources of revenue, which they can use, abuse and throw away because there are always more potential customers out there.

If anyone is having an abortion, then it better be at least as proper as the facility where I had my endoscopy/colonoscopy. It needs to maintain sanitary standards. It needs to have the ability for proper access when problems develop. If we can at least agree on one thing it that standards should always maintained because women's lives are literally at stake from substandard facilities.

[mrswdk]

Mrs. Mongar’s slim chances of survival were seriously hampered because it was exceedingly difficult for responders to get her to the waiting ambulance. The emergency exit was locked.

Reminds me of my friend's dad (who is an architect) complaining that people who own residential buildings in Malaysia often chain up the fire escapes to stop people going out of them to smoke.

[PLAYER57832]

What "information" have I brought in the field of reproductive education is incorrect? .... [rest of post omitted]

I started to quick answer, but your questions/post really deserve more attention than I can give right now. I will answer when I have a chance, but it might be a few days.

OK I'll wait. I have a feeling we may be misunderstanding each other.

How about a reset, then. You say what you do think, and then we can go from there. If you want, make another thread rather than continuing on this one.

To start, I object to your characterization of those favoring legal abortion as somehow "liking" abortion or being "in it for the money". I agree that there are an aberrant few who feel that way, but they are akin to those who think killing abortion doctors and such is OK on the other side. Yes, they exist and are repulsive and not representative.

[tzor]

To start, I object to your characterization of those favoring legal abortion as somehow "liking" abortion or being "in it for the money". I agree that there are an aberrant few who feel that way, but they are akin to those who think killing abortion doctors and such is OK on the other side. Yes, they exist and are repulsive and not representative.

First of all, I never said that those in favor of abortion "like" abortion. I did say that there are those who profit from abortion (and that can include politicians) who are in fact "In it for the money." Really, I don't expect the abortion industry to be populated by a bizarre parody of a religious nun dedicated to poverty, but some people do put their own person gain ahead of the considerations of others. I generally call them EVIL. And the number of such people in the abortion industry is far greater than in the pro-life side because you can't make a living being on the pro-life side.

Anyway, post coming up shortly.

[Metsfanmax]

This is utter and total bullsh*t perpetrated by folks who want to claim abortion is evil and therefore are happy to believe any negative lie.

No the bullshit is with you and everyone else who tries to associate a crappy organization founded on the principles of eugenics with motherhood and apple pie.

Indeed. An organization can never depart from its founding principles.

That's why you're emigrating out of the US, because slavery was one of its founding principles, yes?

[Bernie Sanders]

We got too many people/politicians who oppose abortion. YET, they oppose giving out free birth control pills and condoms to prevent pregnancies.

Not to mention many right wing Republicans feel more inclined to protect the unborn, but don't give a rat ass in helping take care of disadvantaged children.

[Symmetry]

We got too many people/politicians who oppose abortion. YET, they oppose giving out free birth control pills and condoms to prevent pregnancies.

Not to mention many right wing Republicans feel more inclined to protect the unborn, but don't give a rat ass in helping take care of disadvantaged children.

And indeed, many opponents of abortion simply close their eyes to the reality of making abortion illegal. It does not stop abortions, it merely makes it more dangerous. Anti-choicers rarely acknowledge the deaths their rhetoric can cause. They like to skirt around it, or bury their heads.

[tzor]

That's why you're emigrating out of the US, because slavery was one of its founding principles, yes?

No it wasn't. It was a preexisting condition. Much like the overall anti-Catholic sentiment of the time as well. Both influenced the founding but they weren't principles woven into the founding.

[tzor]

We got too many people/politicians who oppose abortion. YET, they oppose giving out free birth control pills and condoms to prevent pregnancies.

First of all, there is no such thing as "free" (no free lunch, no free condom, and no free pill).

Second of all, no one ever gives out the good condoms "free" ... (Planned Parenthood was famous for that, even Consumer Reports called them out on it.)

Third of all, all those cheap condoms led to the "hookup" culture which flipped into the "rape paranoia" culture. The law of unintended consequences can get really odd at times.

Of course a proponent of "free" unlimited education would never understand that point.

[Metsfanmax]

That's why you're emigrating out of the US, because slavery was one of its founding principles, yes?

No it wasn't. It was a preexisting condition. Much like the overall anti-Catholic sentiment of the time as well. Both influenced the founding but they weren't principles woven into the founding.

Well if James Madison can privately be a slave-owner and found a country that doesn't endorse slavery, why can't Margaret Sanger privately endorse eugenics and found an organization that doesn't endorse eugenics?