Offering constructive criticism to the social cripples in our midst since early 2005.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by nononono
What sex ed clas did you have?? Mine, as far as I can recall, didn't mention abstinence at all. Pure mechanics!

As a former mechanic, I applaud your sentiment.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Oh my, I think the Dems should apologize for their racist leader(s), Wilson. And Byrd.

I'm sorry. I'm so sorry. I'M SOOOOOOOOOOOOO SORRY!!!!!!!!!!!

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Not Bob
It's a very difficult issue. I don't know what the answer is, other than to note that there would probably be a lot fewer abortions if there was more to most sex ed classes than "abstinence makes the heart grow fonder."

Perhaps, but in my experience (major big city public school, lots of sex ed courses), education didn't matter. It was more a problem of responsibility (i.e., to use protection) than anything else, and I think that starts in the home.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by bilmore
As a former mechanic, I applaud your sentiment.

Jesus, I hope you didn't build brakes the way you've built today's arguments. There are probably a lot of dead women drivers attributable to you...

... and worse, maybe even some dead babies.

[nononono]

1. Consider elective abortions vs. abortions where someone's health is at risk.

2. What's the relevance of that question? Do you find there is nothing unique between parent and child? (Yes, I know; not in every case.)

Originally posted by ltl/fb
1. What separate situations?

2. You don't think it would be good if every child were a wanted child?

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
FTR, my position is on this issue is evolving. towards the right(eous), but to date I am not anti-any abortion because I am not coming at the concept of a distinctly separately life coming into being and a "soul" taking at conception. I would say the line is at some point near the end of the first trimester or if the pregnancy objectively materially jeopardizes the health of the woman at any time following that. If its an either/or and the baby is not viable then I think it is in society's interest to let the mother choose (intentionally ignoring the issue of whether or not there should be any paternal rights at that point).

That's pretty close to where I am, too.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by taxwonk
I'm sorry. I'm so sorry. I'M SOOOOOOOOOOOOO SORRY!!!!!!!!!!!

Call me a cynic, but I don't think you were being sincere.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Not Bob
That's pretty close to where I am, too.

Strangely enough, almost a perfect fit for me, too.

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by nononono
What sex ed clas did you have?? Mine, as far as I can recall, didn't mention abstinence at all. Pure mechanics!

I didn't have one, unless you count biology.

A bummer, really. I could have used the tips.

[robustpuppy]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
FTR, my position is on this issue is evolving. towards the right(eous), but to date I am not anti-any abortion because I am not coming at the concept of a distinctly separately life coming into being and a "soul" taking at conception. I would say the line is at some point near the end of the first trimester or if the pregnancy objectively materially jeopardizes the health of the woman at any time following that. If its an either/or and the baby is not viable then I think it is in society's interest to let the mother choose (intentionally ignoring the issue of whether or not there should be any paternal rights at that point).

I don't know how people can even stand to have this argument. More so than any other political debate (and it's a crying shame that this issue is so central to American politics), you can never change anyone's mind on it, each side finds the other's viewpoint offensive because the rights on the other side are considered so fundamental, and any compromise point (such as "on demand" versus "when health is at risk")* is utterly arbitrary. It's just exhausting even to witness this debate, let alone to contemplate how it has shaped (or grossly distorted) American political life.

(*Although I will throw in here that this line seems impossible to draw if you concede -- and not everyone does -- that the health risks to women who seek to terminate pregnancies when on demand abortion is not available are relevant.)**

** (Just doing this made me tired.)

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
It's not a question of subordinate, what if they are equivalent?

They can't be. By definition, one of the competing interests has to lose. That's what makes abortion such a Gordian knot.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by bilmore
Strangely enough, almost a perfect fit for me, too.

Me too. I think the aliens will get here in about six minutes. I'm going down to my car for the running shoes and jog bra. Good luck to everyone else in surviving the apocolypse.

[nononono]

Does anyone have any reliable stats on what percentage of abortions are done in the first trimester, due to a direct compromising of the mother's health? It would help me to formulate my thoughts on this if I knew how the breakdown goes, to know if the arguing points are at the fringes or in the middle, volume-wise. I don't, frankly, trust most of the stats I have seen, as they mostly come from agendaed sources. Count me in on the evolving views.

Originally posted by Not Bob
That's pretty close to where I am, too.

[nononono]

Don't worry; I don't think you missed too much. It's nothing like the sensational stories of sex ed classes today I keep hearing about. Now *there's* where you can pick up some technique, apparently.

Originally posted by Not Bob
I didn't have one, unless you count biology.

A bummer, really. I could have used the tips.

[robustpuppy]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Me too. I think the aliens will get here in about six minutes. I'm going down to my car for the running shoes and jog bra. Good luck to everyone else in surviving the apocolypse.

Who knew Penske was the voice of truth and reason?