oh. dear god.

If you look at one of his later post, you can see him declaring

In other words, he thinks that abortion should be illegal after the fifth month, and possibly after the third. I.e. he supports the right to abortion in only some cases. And of course questioning the use of the term “pro-choice” for this position is “immature”.

Yes, it is. Disingenuous too, since you were aware of my position previous to your question, and it’s getting pretty creepy the way you follow me from thread to thread.

Most reasonable realize that the pro-choice label comes with reasonable limits that vary from person to person, but is not an absolute.

I understand that the Chinese sometimes practice abortion by waiting for labor to start. When the head of the baby crowns, they take a hypodermic needle of formaldehyde and inject it into the baby’s brain right through the soft spot in the skull. This kills it literally an instant before birth.

That is a form of abortion.

However, being pro-choice doesn’t mean that I support that, nor do I support partial birth abortion.

This is not an especially unusual stance.

Pro-choice is not a blanket endorsement of all forms and practices of abortion. Obviously.

Why you think it does, why you see hypocrisy in this stance why you insist on engaging in harassing cyberstalking from thread to thread for six months is beyond me.

As I said: It is immature and rude, doubly so, since you already know the answer to the question you are asking.

I strongly suggest you cease and desist.

If you feel you must, go start a thread about your problem with me, and deal with it appropriately.

alright, as to sex education and liberal abortion laws…
what about the netherlands?
sex-ed from age 4, age of consent 14, legal abortions.

fewer teenage pregnancies per capita than the US, and fewer resulting abortions.

and yes, i’m defending the LEGAL right to have an abortion.
not the MORALITY of making that decision.

and guys, make up your mind, is the girl stupid and to blame, or is she too young to be held responsible for her own body?

i personally think she’s paid for anything she did more than enough times already, and neither needs, nor deserves to be flamed further.

Why are these two mutually exclusive? You’re saying she isn’t responsible because she did make choices with her own body.

At 15 she is too young to make all choices regarding her body. And she is stupid.
everton: It doesn’t make sense, I was being sarcastic. It was a response to a classic argument you see all the time: there’s problem X, we try solution Y, problem X gets worse, so we try solution Y a whole lot more.

During the period when sex education has been common in schools, unwanted pregancies have generally risen. Therefore it is not obvious that the solution is more sex education.

irishgirl: If you want duelling anecdotes, fine. Afghanistan. Lower incidence of unwanted pregnancy, no abortions, very low rate of STD transmission. Religious repression is obviously the answer.

Sorry, misspoke. I am sure there are illegal abortions in Afghanistan, but the rate is probably less than in the US (and probably less than in the US prior to the legalization of abortion).

I assume you raised the whole subject of Afghanistan out of sarcasm too? If you’re really suggesting using that country as a template for how Ireland/the UK/the US should be you’re out of your mind.

This whole problem has been caused by a combination of causes, so the only solution will require a combination of changes:[ul]
[li] Parents need to take better control of their kids’ moral welfare (not just apply traditional controls more rigidly). This means allowing kids to act their age and showing sensitivity and wisdom rather than being freaked out by the fact that they do grow up. Nor does it mean looking the other way while they take crazy risks.[/li][li] Kids need to take a more mature attitude to their own sexuality and learn how to respond to the increasing sexualisation of our society.[/li][li] Sex education needs to do its job. Hard as it may be to believe, there are still some kids who believe that you can’t get pregnant the first time, or if you use a Coca Cola douche afterwards, or that AIDS only affects gays and junkies. Somebody’s got to tell them the truth.[/li][/ul]What we’re finding is that none of these things are being done as it should be, and people seem to have a favourite one approach that they think will solve the problem all by itself.

I think there are fewer youth-and-sex-related problems in certain European countries, such as Holland and the Scandinavian ones, because they have a better blend of the solutions rather than an overdependence on just one of them. They don’t show kids porn videos at age 4, they tell them only what the need to know as part of a long-term curriculum. This doesn’t happen behind their parents’ backs - they’re involved in the whole process as far as I can tell. And kids’ parents don’t teach them that sex is a sin or that they’ll be thrown out of the house if they get knocked up - the Scandinavian kids I’ve heard know all about the mechanics of sex, have some experience of pornography by age 15 and yet are happy to wait until they’re genuinely ready before they try sex and don’t behave irresponsibly.

I’m generalising here, of course, but the results seem to back all this up.

Well, like it or not, we (for the most part) do not live in a sexually repressive society. Sex education is a reaction to that change, not a cause.

It isn’t about changing society, it’s about damage control.

obfusciatrist, I would like you to know that I am making a concerted effort not to overreact to your blatant “age-ism” (if I could be so politically correct).

Ah, LaurAnge! Bestill my heart. A good response!

Now, would it be your contention that were it not for the limited sex education we have that in the US, unwanted pregnancies would be even more frequent than they are?

I don’t have a problem with that stance, but it does create a causal relationship.

Also, I am sorry if you feel that me saying 15-year-olds should not be the sole voice in decisions about their bodies is age-ism. You would undoubtedly argue that while the vast majority of 15-year-olds are stupid beyond belief there are a minority capable of handling such decision; and this is also true.

However, all teenagers feel they fall into that camp; no teenager feels they fall into the immature part of the spectrum. So, you’ll have to tolerate it if we adults don’t allow the teenagers to self-determine if they are in the mature group. Further, until you are 18, the government places the burden for your welfare on someone else’s shoulders. As long as that is the case, they should also demand a voice in anything that may effect your welfare. It may be age-ism, but just tacking -ism onto the end of a word doesn’t make it inherently wrong.
[If you, the reader are not a teenager, mentally edit to use the appropriate pronoun]

everton: Of course I don’t think we should emmulate the Taliban.

irishgirl threw out a policy system that she apparently feels is good just because that country has a statistic that she likes. I was just pointing out that other systems can produce that statistic, therefore it is not obvious that the preferred policy decisions caused the statistic.

Hell, I’m all in favor of having a class in high school on how to not be fooled by deceptive text on the boxes of porn videos.

That said, if you are going to support sex education in schools, give a reason that makes sense. If the ultimate purpose of sex education is to avoid unwanted pregnancy and STD transmission, then it should be reasonable to not provide sex education if so other means can be found to achieve that goal.

The reason for teaching sex education is that it is fundamental knowledge about the human body. Schools exist to teach, so teach. This should be done even if STDs didn’t exist and pregnancy were impossible before the age of 25. Sex education is the goal.

My only point in arguing here is that there are MANY ways we can reduce the numbers of abortions, STDs, etc., and sex education isn’t necessarily the most efficient. So, it is stupid to respond to abortion, STDs, etc., with a call for more sex education to the exclusion of the other methods.

It does create a causal relationship. More sex ed equals less unwanted pregnancies caused by ignorance. It does not create a causal relationship with regard to sex ed and the amount of sexual liberty in our society.

I would say that ideally, although it may not fit into the framework of North American society, if you are old enough to get youself carrying a potential child, you are old enough to make your own decisions, no matter how stupid they might be. This is, of course, ideally accomanied by help from social workers etc.

Maybe not, but I would say your brand of age-ism is. No matter how old someone is, or what colour their skin is, or what their economic backgroud is, I believe one should judge the person on their merits and flaws without automatically assuming you know them.

Sorry for the hijack, everybody.

Bolding is mine.

It’s not about not wanting to talk-it’s about RISKING YOUR LIFE rather than talking to your parents? Do you not see the difference? I had a friend whose parents were extremely strict-so strict that she was wild. Her father treated her like shit-thus she was always seeking guys who treated her like shit. She gave herself away quite freely and some would call her a whore.

And had she gotten pregnant, her father would probably have kicked her out on the street-most likely after beating her to within an inch of her life?

Are you still going to tell me this is simply a case of teen angst?

I think it is pretty clear you must have fallen asleep in history class.

Whoa now! Sex Ed at 4 years old? Think again! :slight_smile:
I remember being taught the physics of making babies in school at age 9. Of course, this didn’t focus on safe sex at all - it was the early 80’s. And also, they weren’t telling me or any of the other kids anything we didn’t know already from being told at home. Hell, what 9 year old HASN’T asked that question before?

Anyways, we’re 20 years further now, and I’m sure kids receive safe sex information at an early age. But not 4. More like 11, 12, I suppose. The last years of elementary school.

The age of consent is indeed 14, but only for sex with another minor over 14. In other words, an adult is still a pedophile if he decides to mess around with a 15 year old. Full consent comes at 16 - mainly because there’s numerous situations out there with, say, a 19 year old boy and a 16 year old girl. And as in any case, the line has to be drawn somewhere. However, that doesn’t mean that any adult can just pick up any 16 year old and get away with it!

Also, the legality of abortions in the Netherlands is restricted in terms of the age of the foetus. But yes, it is legal.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Guinastasia *
**

Yes.

In the US currently, giving birth is much more dangerous than a legal abortion performed by a doctor, or even safer, by taking an RU486.

If you make abortions illegal, then only criminals will have abortions.

I’m lazy and refuse to do any research, but I know I’ve heard many many times that many many US teen pregnancies are the result of these stupid fifteen-year-old whores I’ve been reading about being preyed upon by older males. It’s easy to scratch one’s head and rail and lament that not much can be done about the stupidity of the child ho. It seems to me more could be accomplished by turning the spotlight on males who prey upon the stupid child ho.

The child ho does not necessarily choose to become pregnant: she may be made pregnant against her will. (I am not talking about rape as it is commonly defined, that is to say, stranger rape. I’m talking about the male partner refusing to use birth control and the child being either overpowered or argued into acquiescence. Both of which situations, of course, are a reasonable person’s definition of rape, but they are not rape as it is commonly defined.)

Further, the child ho can not always make her own “choices” once she becomes pregnant. If a child is under the control of a self-interested adult (usually a punk-ass ween who can successfully impersonate an adult only among fifteen-year-old kids because he’s six or seven years older than they are), any discourse about her intelligence or for that matter her access to sex-education and birth control is moot.

I worked at a women’s clinic and we had just such a punk-ass ween come in one day with his fifteen-year-old “emancipated minor” “girlfriend” (one of a handful of teenaged girls he was pimping). We gave this child all the sex ed she could take in and it didn’t do much good because this guy owned her. Emancipated minor my raddled ass.

I like this country, I do. Abortion is a horror beyond the imagination, but the rape and sexual enslavement of children is commonplace and the fault of girls who tart around the middle and high schools in salacious hello kitty tees. It’s all downhill for children once they’re out of the womb. They start toddling and we look at them suspiciously. They hit menarche and we throw 'em to the wolves.

I’m lazy and refuse to do any research, but I know I’ve heard many many times that many many US teen pregnancies are the result of these stupid fifteen-year-old whores I’ve been reading about being preyed upon by older males. It’s easy to scratch one’s head and rail and lament that not much can be done about the stupidity of the child ho. It seems to me more could be accomplished by turning the spotlight on males who prey upon the stupid child ho.

The child ho does not necessarily choose to become pregnant: she may be made pregnant against her will. (I am not talking about rape as it is commonly defined, that is to say, stranger rape. I’m talking about the male partner refusing to use birth control and the child being either overpowered or argued into acquiescence. Both of which situations, of course, are a reasonable person’s definition of rape, but they are not rape as it is commonly defined.)

Further, the child ho can not always make her own “choices” once she becomes pregnant. If a child is under the control of a self-interested adult (usually a punk-ass ween who can successfully impersonate an adult only among fifteen-year-old kids because he’s six or seven years older than they are), any discourse about her intelligence or for that matter her access to sex-education and birth control is moot.

I worked at a women’s clinic and we had just such a punk-ass ween come in one day with his fifteen-year-old “emancipated minor” “girlfriend” (one of a handful of teenaged girls he was pimping). We gave this child all the sex ed she could take in and it didn’t do much good because this guy owned her. Emancipated minor my raddled ass.

I like this country, I do. Abortion is a horror beyond the imagination, but the rape and sexual enslavement of children is commonplace and the fault of girls who tart around the middle and high schools in salacious hello kitty tees. It’s all downhill for children once they’re out of the womb. They start toddling and we look at them suspiciously. They hit menarche and we throw 'em to the wolves.

How can obfusciatrist and enPhantBlanc type with their heads stuck up their arses? I know this is The Pit, but the bare minimum requirement should be an ability to construct a sentence.

Fuck off, both of you, until you can make a cogent contribution to this debate.

Just out of curiosity, which of my sentences did you find poorly constructed?

I’m too lazy to do research but…
Oh yes…you’ll fit in REALLY well around here.
:rolleyes: