I can't for the life of me figure out why people still think abstinence only sex education is a good idea.
Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
Sure - they don't have access to a condom, the pill, withdrawal, etc., etc., etc., but they apparently have access to an abortion...
everyone knows what an abortion is. whether you're for it, or against it, you know what it is. Not everyone knows about the effectiveness of safe sex devices. Some abstinence only programs use lies that basically make the contraceptives look useless. And most of the time, hormones are stronger than a pledge so when the kids decide to have sex either they don't have condoms or look at it as "What the hell. They barely work anyway."
Sure - they don't have access to a condom, the pill, withdrawal, etc., etc., etc., but they apparently have access to an abortion..
everyone knows what an abortion is. whether you're for it, or against it, you know what it is. Not everyone knows about the effectiveness of safe sex devices. Some abstinence only programs use lies that basically make the contraceptives look useless. And most of the time, hormones are stronger than a pledge so when the kids decide to have sex either they don't have condoms or look at it as "What the hell. They barely work anyway."
And not everyone knows the ineffectiveness of some contraceptive methods. Hell, it looks like some people even still think the withdrawal method is a good idea!
I totally agree with your point, by the way. Abstinence-only-until-marriage education only undermines efforts to fight unintended pregnancy.
And not everyone knows the ineffectiveness of some contraceptive methods. Hell, it looks like some people even still think the withdrawal method is a good idea!
I totally agree with your point, by the way. Abstinence-only-until-marriage education only undermines efforts to fight unintended pregnancy.
Ya know, in my high school sex ed class they made it very, very clear that pulling out was highly ineffective. But ya know, those damn sex ed classes are only about teaching sexual positions, not about diseases, contraceptives, or the advantages of waiting to have sex (Yes, they even taught us about that).
identical twins also are unique and individual from others and from each other. This is because once they are conceived they have different environmental impressions made on their genetic material creating different outcomes from the beginning.
And they are most certainly not their mother or their father, either. They aren't the mother they dwell within anymore than they are the crib they sleep in when they are born, or the house that houses them as they grow!
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
When do you consider that "a bit of DNA" becomes an actual person?
Well see, now that's a different issue. And maybe this is what some people should be asking instead of suggesting that a human being is killed by every abortion regardless of gestational age.
But, although I can see where it's reasonable for the abortion debate to hinge on this issue for some people, it's somewhat irrelevant to my personal beliefs.
there should never be any legislation that dictates what a woman should be allowed to do with her body that trepasses against her own free will. ALL persons should have the right of sovereignty over their own body.
exactly.
as to 'unique DNA'...quite honestly, so what? that's it? b/c it's a unique cluster of cells...it 'deserves' to live? that's it, that's the arguement for it? 'unique DNA' dies off naturally, all the time.....even that unique DNA in the uterus. it is said that almost all sexually active women have spontaneous abortion - aka miscarriage - at least once in their life...and it's so early on, she is unaware. 'unique DNA' alone does not 'deserve' anything imo. so if it can happen quite 'naturally'....why is it wrong to happen unnaturally? we extend life unnaturally ALL the time...so why can't we end the possibility of life too? why the distinction?
i remember a great analogy our dear hippiemom hade about acorns and trees.....and of course i cannot remember it exactly, but it was so fitting. lots of 'life' doesn't ever get the chance to happen...and so it goes.
i realize some believe conception is the beginning of human life and good on you...don't have an abortion. for those who don't believe it, do not believe a cluster of cells to BE it, has no sensory perception whatsoever....allow them the right to believe and do as they see fit. disagree, again, all good...just don't try to interfere with anyone else's rights and choices, especially what occurs in their own body.....and it is all good. i am all for free beliefs, and the individual choice for all.
as to 'unique DNA'...quite honestly, so what? that's it? b/c it's a unique cluster of cells...it 'deserves' to live? that's it, that's the arguement for it? 'unique DNA' dies off naturally, all the time.....even that unique DNA in the uterus. it is said that almost all sexually active woman have sponatneous abortion - aka miscarriage - once in their life...and it's so early on, she is unaware. 'unique DNA' alone does not 'deserve' anything imo.
i remember a great analogy our dear hippiemom hade about acorns and trees.....and of course i cannot remember it exactly, but it was so fitting. lots of 'life' doesn't ever get the chance to happen...and so it goes.
i realize some believe conception is the beginning of human life and good on you...don't have an abortion. for those who don't believe it, do not believe a cluster of cells to BE it, has no sensory perception whatsoever....allow them the right to believe and do as they see fit. disagree, again, all good...just don't try to interfere with anyone else's rights and choices, especially what occurs in their own body.....and it is all good. i am all for free beliefs, and the individual choice for all.
To me, there is sensitized, and there is desensitized.
There is living life tied into merely sensory data and three-dimensional experience, and there is perceiving the depths and glory and multi-dimensions of life. How I approach such questions determines my personal experience in life.
I personally approach my experiences and all I deal with with reverence.
Some life may not get the chance to happen. The question for me is, do I have the right to deliberately and willfully end the existence of another being with human DNA?
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Ya know, in my high school sex ed class they made it very, very clear that pulling out was highly ineffective. But ya know, those damn sex ed classes are only about teaching sexual positions, not about diseases, contraceptives, or the advantages of waiting to have sex (Yes, they even taught us about that).
WAIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :eek: They teach positions?????????????????????
A bit of DNA is an actual person? A few cells is an actual person? Are you committing genocide every time you exfoliate?
Never mind when you exfoliate, what about the state requiring DNA samples, which clearly they'll be killing when they squish em onto a microscope slide for future reference, and adding them to crime data bases and who knows what else. I guess it means every time dna is extracted it's murder?
If the DNA is an individual person and therefore capable of life then by all means remove it from my body and let it start its life. Although as a 50% co contributer to its existence I would still have a say in what happens.
Never mind when you exfoliate, what about the state requiring DNA samples, which clearly they'll be killing when they squish em onto a microscope slide for future reference, and adding them to crime data bases and who knows what else. I guess it means every time dna is extracted it's murder?
If the DNA is an individual person and therefore capable of life then by all means remove it from my body and let it start its life. Although as a 50% co contributer to its existence I would still have a say in what happens.
Minimizing the issue is just that. It doesn't address the actual issue, making a valid counterpoint.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Some life may not get the chance to happen. The question for me is, do I have the right to deliberately and willfully end the existence of another being with human DNA?
Once again, how is a bit of DNA a "being"? And if it only becomes a being after a certain point, what's wrong with having an abortion before that point?
None of this really matters, though, as long as you continue to speak in the first person.
WAIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :eek: They teach positions?????????????????????
i missed THAT in sex ed.
seriously...i am ALL for individual beliefs and choices. i respect that. i completely respect beliefs, opinions and choices that run absolutely counter of my own. you do your thing and allow me to do mine. simple.
i find it very arbitrary that many believe human life is so 'sacred' for lack of a better term...above all else. and ANY chance is necessary. besides which if it cannot survive without living within the mother...again, for me, it's simple: my body, my choice. i don't want a cancer to have the right to grow in my body...so if i don't want a child to, my right as well. to some, i guess that sounds crass and insulting. however, to me a cluster of cells that has the possibility of growing into an individual human being is just that; a cluster of cells.
and i 'get' the BC arguement, i do...and yet the same groups that fight abortion ALSO fight access and education to BC....so wtf do these groups really want? we have amazing minds that can think and create so much....like the ability to control our numbers, and yet some are against it. are they also against organ donation? pace makers? chemotherapy? things that artifically extend life? i am at a loss to how that all 'works'....some consistency would aide my understanding. however, whatEVER anyone believes...great, fine, wonderful...just allow others to do the same, and live their lives as they see fit...and it's all good.
Once again, how is a bit of DNA a "being"? And if it only becomes a being after a certain point, what's wrong with having an abortion before that point?
None of this really matters, though, as long as you continue to speak in the first person.
I look at life in a holistic perspective. I see that when I break life into fragments, I'm not seeing realistically, within the context of what is.
In a holistic comprehensive view, one can move in either direction, in time, seeing the physical beginning of the individual with it's DNA, to the other end of the spectrum, to the potential of it's life, which can be conceptualized at different places, like birth, first day of school, marriage, death, etc. In a holistic view, once conceived, this physical entity with it's unique DNA cannot be denied as a human being. To do so is merely to close one's perspective down to a limited and unrealistic perspective for reasons of personal bias, out of synch with the truth.
One can minimize the reality...one can call this unique individual a "bit of DNA", or cells, and yet, it is what it is in the big picture, within nature.
The perspective we choose will determine the choices we make on this subject, and the outcome we receive. And whether or not we experience life fully emotionally, spiritually, etc.
I spent many years living a fragmented and subsequently pained existence.
Seeing realisitically and being attuned to the big picture, including the depths and textures of life not only allows one to continually create a life of joy, but it also eliminates creating negative life consequences to learn from.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
So abortion is only opposed by Christians? Get real.
Well you can always find a couple of exceptions but mostly that generalisation holds.
The hardliners demonstrating in washington and taping kids mouths shut-those are christans. The republican party - are all christians and big surpise its always their policy. Most of the people arguing here are arguing becuase it offends their Christian values. In other countries this debate never reaches the level of fervour it does in the US becuase there is not the large number of fundamentalist Christain groups with electoral influence.
I may be msitaken but I don't think anyone here is advocating very late term abortions. But the black and white approach of religous groups to this debate means that even a blastocyst is being considered a 'being' or child in this debate. And that is rubbish.
Minimizing the issue is just that. It doesn't address the actual issue, making a valid counterpoint.
There's no point attempting to make what you would consider a "valid counterpoint" as far as I can see. There's my opinion on this issue and there's your opinion on this issue. As far as I'm concerned my point was valid, but clearly you do not think so.
If you wish to view my opinion as minimizing the issue by all means go right ahead. It could be said that your efforts with in hiding, myself and a few other people in this thread are condescending and that you wish to conduct the conversation on your own terms so any other opinion or perspective is going to be invalid. So be it. Please do not take this response as an indication that I wish to continue to discuss the issue with you further. I do not.
It could be said that your efforts with in hiding... are condescending ...
It can be considered condescending to ask someone if they are able to express their case with reasons? Interesting.
I understand if you are not willing to discuss this with me.
I choose to discuss this, however.
When you compare a DNA test, which has the intent to test something, while leaving it integrally intact and whole, with an abortion, where the intent is to completely and permanently terminate the entity in question, I see a minimization of the actual issue. When sloughing off cells, while leaving an integral being at-one and whole is being compared with terminating the integral entity, I see a minimization of the actual issue.
If this difference is not being comprehended, then the subject in question is not being comprehended.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
I look at life in a holistic perspective. I see that when I break life into fragments, I'm not seeing realistically, within the context of what is.
In a holistic comprehensive view, one can move in either direction, in time, seeing the physical beginning of the individual with it's DNA, to the other end of the spectrum, to the potential of it's life, which can be conceptualized at different places, like birth, first day of school, marriage, death, etc. In a holistic view, once conceived, this physical entity with it's unique DNA cannot be denied as a human being. To do so is merely to close one's perspective down to a limited and unrealistic perspective for reasons of personal bias, out of synch with the truth.
And yet your so-called "holistic comprehensive view" seems itself to break life into fragments, making a distinction between human life and other life. So claiming to have a truly holistic, comprehensive, unfragmented view of life is what seems to me to be not seeing realistically and out of sync with the truth.
One can minimize the reality...one can call this unique individual a "bit of DNA", or cells, and yet, it is what it is in the big picture, within nature.
The perspective we choose will determine the choices we make on this subject, and the outcome we receive. And whether or not we experience life fully emotionally, spiritually, etc.
I spent many years living a fragmented and subsequently pained existence.
Seeing realisitically and being attuned to the big picture, including the depths and textures of life not only allows one to continually create a life of joy, but it also eliminates creating negative life consequences to learn from.
Are you saying that women who have abortions or believe in abortion rights don't "experience life fully emotionally, spiritually, etc."? Are you saying they live a "fragmented and subsequently pained existence"? Are you saying they don't create lives of joy but instead create negative life consequences? That's what it sound like you're saying to me, so I would like to clarify.
And yet your so-called "holistic comprehensive view" seems itself to break life into fragments, making a distinction between human life and other life. So claiming to have a truly holistic, comprehensive, unfragmented view of life is what seems to me to be not seeing realistically and out of sync with the truth.
Are you saying that women who have abortions or believe in abortion rights don't "experience life fully emotionally, spiritually, etc."? Are you saying they live a "fragmented and subsequently pained existence"? Are you saying they don't create lives of joy but instead create negative life consequences? That's what it sound like you're saying to me, so I would like to clarify.
honestly....does it matter?
i truly could NOT care less what ANYone believes...as long as they do not try to infringe on MY, or other womens...personal rights to make their own choices. there will ALWAYS be those whose own thoughts will run counter to my own. i do not see the need, besides i think it would be utterly exhausting, as well as a waste of time..to try to make others see the world from MY perspective. i think it better to simply respect we all have unique views....and ALLOW others to make their own choices. that is ALL i ask of anyone. believe as you see fit, i shall do the same...but lets mutually respect each other to make our own choices.
btw - not speaking for anyone...was simply just sayin'....:)
i find many topics, this one most definitely...go round and round and round...where i think the heart of the matter simply is, respect for individual choice. as long as the law remains on the side of allowing women personal choice...than all is good imo.
Comments
This is also true. Like I said, depends which side of the fence you sit on.
everyone knows what an abortion is. whether you're for it, or against it, you know what it is. Not everyone knows about the effectiveness of safe sex devices. Some abstinence only programs use lies that basically make the contraceptives look useless. And most of the time, hormones are stronger than a pledge so when the kids decide to have sex either they don't have condoms or look at it as "What the hell. They barely work anyway."
It does not share it's mother's DNA.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Well, technically it does. It has 50% of its Mothers DNA, and 50% of its Fathers.
And not everyone knows the ineffectiveness of some contraceptive methods. Hell, it looks like some people even still think the withdrawal method is a good idea!
I totally agree with your point, by the way. Abstinence-only-until-marriage education only undermines efforts to fight unintended pregnancy.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
So? If someone else had the same DNA would that make abortion more acceptable? Is it less acceptable for unique DNA to never become an actual person?
Ya know, in my high school sex ed class they made it very, very clear that pulling out was highly ineffective. But ya know, those damn sex ed classes are only about teaching sexual positions, not about diseases, contraceptives, or the advantages of waiting to have sex (Yes, they even taught us about that).
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
A bit of DNA is an actual person? A few cells is an actual person? Are you committing genocide every time you exfoliate?
Bullshit!!
"What a stupid lamb."
"What a sick, masochistic lion."
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Do you have reasoning to back this up?
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
What about identical twins?
And they are most certainly not their mother or their father, either. They aren't the mother they dwell within anymore than they are the crib they sleep in when they are born, or the house that houses them as they grow!
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Well see, now that's a different issue. And maybe this is what some people should be asking instead of suggesting that a human being is killed by every abortion regardless of gestational age.
But, although I can see where it's reasonable for the abortion debate to hinge on this issue for some people, it's somewhat irrelevant to my personal beliefs.
exactly.
as to 'unique DNA'...quite honestly, so what? that's it? b/c it's a unique cluster of cells...it 'deserves' to live? that's it, that's the arguement for it? 'unique DNA' dies off naturally, all the time.....even that unique DNA in the uterus. it is said that almost all sexually active women have spontaneous abortion - aka miscarriage - at least once in their life...and it's so early on, she is unaware. 'unique DNA' alone does not 'deserve' anything imo. so if it can happen quite 'naturally'....why is it wrong to happen unnaturally? we extend life unnaturally ALL the time...so why can't we end the possibility of life too? why the distinction?
i remember a great analogy our dear hippiemom hade about acorns and trees.....and of course i cannot remember it exactly, but it was so fitting. lots of 'life' doesn't ever get the chance to happen...and so it goes.
i realize some believe conception is the beginning of human life and good on you...don't have an abortion. for those who don't believe it, do not believe a cluster of cells to BE it, has no sensory perception whatsoever....allow them the right to believe and do as they see fit. disagree, again, all good...just don't try to interfere with anyone else's rights and choices, especially what occurs in their own body.....and it is all good. i am all for free beliefs, and the individual choice for all.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
There is living life tied into merely sensory data and three-dimensional experience, and there is perceiving the depths and glory and multi-dimensions of life. How I approach such questions determines my personal experience in life.
I personally approach my experiences and all I deal with with reverence.
Some life may not get the chance to happen. The question for me is, do I have the right to deliberately and willfully end the existence of another being with human DNA?
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
WAIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :eek: They teach positions?????????????????????
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
Never mind when you exfoliate, what about the state requiring DNA samples, which clearly they'll be killing when they squish em onto a microscope slide for future reference, and adding them to crime data bases and who knows what else. I guess it means every time dna is extracted it's murder?
If the DNA is an individual person and therefore capable of life then by all means remove it from my body and let it start its life. Although as a 50% co contributer to its existence I would still have a say in what happens.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Once again, how is a bit of DNA a "being"? And if it only becomes a being after a certain point, what's wrong with having an abortion before that point?
None of this really matters, though, as long as you continue to speak in the first person.
i missed THAT in sex ed.
seriously...i am ALL for individual beliefs and choices. i respect that. i completely respect beliefs, opinions and choices that run absolutely counter of my own. you do your thing and allow me to do mine. simple.
i find it very arbitrary that many believe human life is so 'sacred' for lack of a better term...above all else. and ANY chance is necessary. besides which if it cannot survive without living within the mother...again, for me, it's simple: my body, my choice. i don't want a cancer to have the right to grow in my body...so if i don't want a child to, my right as well. to some, i guess that sounds crass and insulting. however, to me a cluster of cells that has the possibility of growing into an individual human being is just that; a cluster of cells.
and i 'get' the BC arguement, i do...and yet the same groups that fight abortion ALSO fight access and education to BC....so wtf do these groups really want? we have amazing minds that can think and create so much....like the ability to control our numbers, and yet some are against it. are they also against organ donation? pace makers? chemotherapy? things that artifically extend life? i am at a loss to how that all 'works'....some consistency would aide my understanding. however, whatEVER anyone believes...great, fine, wonderful...just allow others to do the same, and live their lives as they see fit...and it's all good.
absolutely.
believe as you see fit, make your own, individual choices...and allow others the same. cool.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
In a holistic comprehensive view, one can move in either direction, in time, seeing the physical beginning of the individual with it's DNA, to the other end of the spectrum, to the potential of it's life, which can be conceptualized at different places, like birth, first day of school, marriage, death, etc. In a holistic view, once conceived, this physical entity with it's unique DNA cannot be denied as a human being. To do so is merely to close one's perspective down to a limited and unrealistic perspective for reasons of personal bias, out of synch with the truth.
One can minimize the reality...one can call this unique individual a "bit of DNA", or cells, and yet, it is what it is in the big picture, within nature.
The perspective we choose will determine the choices we make on this subject, and the outcome we receive. And whether or not we experience life fully emotionally, spiritually, etc.
I spent many years living a fragmented and subsequently pained existence.
Seeing realisitically and being attuned to the big picture, including the depths and textures of life not only allows one to continually create a life of joy, but it also eliminates creating negative life consequences to learn from.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Well you can always find a couple of exceptions but mostly that generalisation holds.
The hardliners demonstrating in washington and taping kids mouths shut-those are christans. The republican party - are all christians and big surpise its always their policy. Most of the people arguing here are arguing becuase it offends their Christian values. In other countries this debate never reaches the level of fervour it does in the US becuase there is not the large number of fundamentalist Christain groups with electoral influence.
I may be msitaken but I don't think anyone here is advocating very late term abortions. But the black and white approach of religous groups to this debate means that even a blastocyst is being considered a 'being' or child in this debate. And that is rubbish.
So how about you get real?
There's no point attempting to make what you would consider a "valid counterpoint" as far as I can see. There's my opinion on this issue and there's your opinion on this issue. As far as I'm concerned my point was valid, but clearly you do not think so.
If you wish to view my opinion as minimizing the issue by all means go right ahead. It could be said that your efforts with in hiding, myself and a few other people in this thread are condescending and that you wish to conduct the conversation on your own terms so any other opinion or perspective is going to be invalid. So be it. Please do not take this response as an indication that I wish to continue to discuss the issue with you further. I do not.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
I understand if you are not willing to discuss this with me.
I choose to discuss this, however.
When you compare a DNA test, which has the intent to test something, while leaving it integrally intact and whole, with an abortion, where the intent is to completely and permanently terminate the entity in question, I see a minimization of the actual issue. When sloughing off cells, while leaving an integral being at-one and whole is being compared with terminating the integral entity, I see a minimization of the actual issue.
If this difference is not being comprehended, then the subject in question is not being comprehended.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
And yet your so-called "holistic comprehensive view" seems itself to break life into fragments, making a distinction between human life and other life. So claiming to have a truly holistic, comprehensive, unfragmented view of life is what seems to me to be not seeing realistically and out of sync with the truth.
Are you saying that women who have abortions or believe in abortion rights don't "experience life fully emotionally, spiritually, etc."? Are you saying they live a "fragmented and subsequently pained existence"? Are you saying they don't create lives of joy but instead create negative life consequences? That's what it sound like you're saying to me, so I would like to clarify.
honestly....does it matter?
i truly could NOT care less what ANYone believes...as long as they do not try to infringe on MY, or other womens...personal rights to make their own choices. there will ALWAYS be those whose own thoughts will run counter to my own. i do not see the need, besides i think it would be utterly exhausting, as well as a waste of time..to try to make others see the world from MY perspective. i think it better to simply respect we all have unique views....and ALLOW others to make their own choices. that is ALL i ask of anyone. believe as you see fit, i shall do the same...but lets mutually respect each other to make our own choices.
btw - not speaking for anyone...was simply just sayin'....:)
i find many topics, this one most definitely...go round and round and round...where i think the heart of the matter simply is, respect for individual choice. as long as the law remains on the side of allowing women personal choice...than all is good imo.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow