No. Pro-choice people support the idea that decisions on what to do about pregnancies belong in the hands of the people actually involved in the situation, and not in the hands of the government. The use of the word “choice” implies that there are multiple options to choose from, no?
I don’t know of anyone who thinks that all pregnancies should be terminated all the time.
What’s the difference between Al Gore and a truckload of dead babies?
I don’t know.
A truckload of dead babies didn’t invent the internet?
But as part of that ‘choice’, the pro-choice crowd accepts ending a pregnancy as a valid option. That is defacto acceptance, if not support, for termination of pregnancies.
I’m having just a little bit of trouble believing that a teacher actually said these words to her class. Well, a lot of trouble, actually. I think it’s possible that your daughter misunderstood something.
My opinion, anyway.
spooje - if you knew half the idiotic things my teachers said when I was in grade school you would have no problem believing this. Just two small examples - which I’ve mentioned here before - I had two different teachers on two different occasions chastise me for claiming ‘ought’ [in one case] and ‘ditto’ [in another case] were actual words. The one teacher thought ditto was a word I made up and the other thought ought was improper slang.
Oh, and more on topic, I’ve never had a republican teacher that was afraid to openly push their agenda (and again I repeat, I am not a democrat or a republican so this is not a biased statement.)
Does he put them on spikes?
( ** spooje, ** it kinda doesn’t matter if she didn’t use those words, if that is what the kid came away with.)
I am pro-choice, but I think you should explain this a little better. You don’t mean she’s an idiot for being pro-life, correct? Just the way she put it you don’t agree with, right?
I would be just as angered if the teacher had said something about pro-lifers. It’s incredible that she said something like this.
My US Government teacher was more of a Liberal, and I made it clear I was more conservative, but we got along wonderfully. He taught me to be open. He himself could argue against his beliefs on many issues, and made it clear that there was, for the most part, a reason people feel the way they do. Even if he didn’t agree, he understood. We would have debates… and we could pick the subject that we wanted to debate, but not the side we were arguing. He had us flip a coin for that. Best teacher ever.
An educator should get into a lot of trouble for saying what this jackass did.
hajario
I just want to make clear of what I was trying to say. The “not so much for” made it sound to me like you were saying she was KIND OF an idiot to be pro life. I’m sure I’m reading into it. But even it that’s what you were saying, you’re entitled to think that way just as she is entitled to think the way she does. This, however is the pit, and I guess it would be appropriate to claim someone as being an idiot for their political ideas.
Brutus, I had a whole fucking thing written out for you. Fucking AOL. I know you weren’t trying to justify what the teacher said, but rather explain that she may, technically TO SOME PEOPLE, be accurate in what she said. (I think??)
Short hand, can you be a killer if you aren’t pursuing the actual ACT of killing?
If there are three women in the room, one about to kill another… Her reasoning for ‘offing’ the other woman would be debatable, or controversial to people all over the world, but the third party (who has nothing to do with the other two, other than knowing why the potential killer wants the other dead), happens to support the potential killers decision to make up her own mind. The woman who was possibly going to get killed… did. Doesn’t make the third party a killer.
THIS IS IN NO WAY TO SUPPOSED TO BE RELEVANT TO ABORTION, OTHER THAN TO EXPLAIN WHAT A KILLER IS TECHNICALLY.
Exactly. While I am generally pro-life, I really don’t care enough about the whole issue to call someone a slayer of children over it. But there are, of course, pro-lifers who do.
**
Good example towards abortion itself, actually. But since you state, in caps, that it should not be used as such, I won’t.
Woman #3 is morally corrupt, if not actually a killer. Supporting a persons’ ‘right to choose’ to kill someone is pretty damned low. (Assuming the killing is self defence.)
Right, but like I said, there’s a ‘reason’ for the other person to die. Perhaps the person that’s about to get killed ASKED to be dead because of an illness, or maybe she was threatening to push a bottom for a bomb to explode… whatever it was, it was enough to get the support of a lot of people (not unlike abortion), for the ultimate killer to choose for themselves what the right act is.
The reason for the “disclaimer” was to avoid people say that the soon-to-dead woman can’t be compared to a child which hasn’t been born yet. I REALLY don’t want to go their… I just told the story to refute your claim that people who are pro-choice are (by some) killers, because I don’t think they are no matter how you slice it… This is pertaining to the OP… and I want to keep it that way. I DON’T want people to start comparing an unborn child to an already born person… no matter which side you’re on, I don’t care. That’s why I put the “disclaimer” there.
button = bottom.
Posted by Spoogie
It was my son. He came home to ask me if it was true.
Oops. Sorry. :smack:
I dunno… I’m kind of with spooje on this one. I know from personal experience with my own two darling kids (now 15 and 16) that what they hear is often quite different from what was actually [said*.
In any case, this subject clearly needs to be addressed. Certainly, if it were me I would go in and talk to the teacher. However, I would at least begin the conversation in a pleasant manner, giving the teacher the benefit of the doubt, but asking firmly for an explanation. Something like, “Miss Doofus, Littledragongirl was very upset yesterday. She told me that you you said Al Gore kills children.”
Now, if her response might very well be, “Yes! Don’t you know he’s pro-abortion? Abortion kills children!” If so, it will be time to ratchet the confrontation up a notch as this sort of rhetoric clearly has no place in a public school classroom. At that point, I’d take it to the principal.
Or I suppose her response might be, “Yes! Al Gore kills children! He eats them too! After Tipper roasts them and serves them with a nice Chardonney! The world must know!” In that case, you’d better call the booby hatch and have her carried away.
Or, there’s every possibility that she will say, “What? No! That’s not what I said! I said that I personally feel the Democratic party holds some policies that are damaging to children. I was careful to explain that this is a personal opinion and part of the beauty of the democratic process is that every voter can vote according to his or her own personal opinion. My goodness! Al Gore doesn’t kill children!” In which case, you’d feel silly if you’d gone in snorting fire.
Jess
The outcome of all this fooferaw is probably that a bunch of kids went home, talked to their folks and learned a little bit more about Al Gore, abortion and hyperbole. Not such a bad outcome.
A teacher sounded off on a controversial issue? (shock waves spread). Beat her!
Everyone knows, though, that it’s Tom Daschle that kills babies. It’s why he had to drop out of the presidential race.
I believe that the teacher did use those words because I have heard kids quote adults in this exact same way about Bill Clinton. Apparently there are people out there who think it’s appropriate to simplify the abortion issue this way when explaining it to kids.
The insane may construe anything from anything, and as such should not factor in to this conversation.
The Gore daughters are indirectly responsible for killing kittens, probably. (God kills a kitten every time you… Ah, never mind)
And let’s not start on what the Bush daughters must be indirectly responsible for…