Weekend question
Today is Protest the Pill Day ’08: The Pill Kills Babies. It marks the 43rd anniversary of the Supreme Court’s Griswold vs. Connecticut decision that freed Planned Parenthood exec Estelle Griswold to peddle birth control pills legally she had been peddling illegally. And the rest is history. We can certainly look back over the past 4 decades and see the number of “unwanted” children conceived has dropped, right?
Since that time the contraception/abortion industry has engaged in a cover-up to keep women ignorant about the fact the bc pill may abort 5- to 9-day old preborn children by making the uterus impermeable to their attachment.
Several supposedly feminist writers have taken offense to my WND column this week publicizing The Pill Kills Day….
Blogger phlebotnum showcased her “liberal lady brain[]” by writing:
Jill Stanek is really concerned about all the poor, misinformed women out there who use the pill…. Why? Because our liberal lady brains can’t seem to understand that fertilization is equal to implantation in the womb. Except that it totally isn’t the same thing at all. The Pill prevents pregnancy; it does not terminate it.
Chris at the People for the American Way blog displayed typical liberal understanding of capitalism by adding:
Apparently, this information has been suppressed, because “if women knew, some would feel morally obligated to refuse that contraceptive option. And that would mess up lucrative birth control pill sales, which nets pro-aborts hundreds of millions of dollars a year, as well as abortion sales from failed birth control pills.” And they call us the ones with the conspiracy theories.
And closed Jill at Feministe, after joyfully jesting my column about informed consent:
Lesson learned: Even reading anti-choice columns will turn you into a moron.
The Capitol Fax blog even converted my column into a question of the day:
Will a protest like this alienate pro-life activists from the “center,” or will it serve a useful purpose for their cause? Explain.
This is a good question, because fear of “alientat[ion]… from the ‘center'” is I think part of the reason many pro-life organizations do not take this issue on.
So I’ll ask the same question.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
It’s not about keeping the “center” happy or not.
The truth is the truth.
If people can’t handle the truth, then oh well.
We can certainly look back over the past 4 decades and see the number of “unwanted” children conceived has dropped, right?
Compared to what it would have been – oh yeah.
NOTICE:
I realize that on other blogs posting as anonymous is allowed, even encouraged. But here on Jill’s we are all about conversation. Something that is very difficult when 5 or 6 people are posting under the same moniker.
Jill and I have discussed this, and we have decided that from now on anyone posted as anonymous will be removed.
We are trying to make commenting easier for everyone.
You do not need to put your email in to post. So call yourself Buford, Amos, Clyde or Florence and we still won’t know who you are in the real world. But we WILL know who we are speaking with here on Jill’s site.
Thanks for understanding…
MK
(with Jill’s approval)
Elizabeth, if people can’t handle the truth, then I’m going to send this guy to your house:
MK, how many different IP addresses are there? It’d be funny if it was only like 5 or 6….
I agree with Elizabeth. It’s not about keeping the “center” happy. The truth is the truth.
Just like homosexuality is related to abortion. If people can’t handle the truth…too bad.
I know, Doug. If anyone can have a “secret identity” and not get caught, it’s you!
Hmmm… I KNEW there was a reason you’re always so nice… so we won’t suspect anything…mwahaha…
Jill, if other blogs are talking about your column/blog then you must be doing something right. Keep up the good work.
To an activist against the “personhood” amendment, the extremism in opposing the birth control pill is a dream come true.
When the voters appreciate that the proponents of “personhood” want to ban all forms of artificial birth control, including the pill, that 90%+ of women use or have used, and ban in-vitro fertilization, which probably 75% of voters have children, co workers and neighbors that have used or are using, it will be clear this is WAY too extreme for anyone other than a tiny minority fringe group.
The voters will find out that the proponents are an extremist group that wants to set women’s rights back 50 to 100 years. Though they probably also want to repeal women’s right to vote, that won’t succeed, and women will turn out in record numbers to defeat this extremism. Men will also reject it in record numbers.
Keep the extremism coming. The more the better.
The proponents of “personhood” will be portrayed as the “American Taliban” and such a characterization is fair, since it is clear that they want power over the private lives of every person, and to subjugate everyone to their “religious” thuggery.
Actually, what I’ve seen and read most recently is that in cases when there is break-through ovulation, the corpus leuteum in the ovary produces enough hormones to offset the impact of the Pill on the uterus. In other words, the Pill probably does not cause early abortions. Which is GOOD news.
The proponents of the
Oh, NO, Jill, absolutely not! In fact, the anti-birth control movement will be even MORE successful than the anti-abortion movement! If there’s anything people care more about than unwanted fetuses, it’s unwanted fertilized eggs! This will be THE issue that proves, once and for all, that anti-choice activists are NOT nosy, woman-hating fruitcakes! I’m SURE of it!
MAN, this board is quiet today.
I think this is the one subject that will even alienate 98% of all pro-lifers.
OOh – Christina, thank you for that article. =)
Reality, were you being sarcastic? :)
Yes Laura, it is quiet here, and even the 2% fringe group haven’t crawled out from under their rocks, yet.
Maybe the 2% ers can’t handle the truth- that their extreme positions doom them to be little more than the butt of jokes.
There are some good comments under the Capitol Fax blog linked above.
Hey guys,
That first comment that was posted by Elizabeth was not me..the real Elizabeth..or the one that’s the single mom I guess I should say. Other Elizabeth? Could you change your name to maybe Elizabeth 2 or something? It would be confusing..unless you’re trying to be an imposter of me. But good luck with that one if you are..I’m one of a kind. :)
Oh, NO, Jill, absolutely not! In fact, the anti-birth control movement will be even MORE successful than the anti-abortion movement! If there’s anything people care more about than unwanted fetuses, it’s unwanted fertilized eggs! This will be THE issue that proves, once and for all, that anti-choice activists are NOT nosy, woman-hating fruitcakes! I’m SURE of it!
Posted by: reality at June 7, 2008 12:06 PM
MAN, this board is quiet today.
I think this is the one subject that will even alienate 98% of all pro-lifers.
Posted by: Laura at June 7, 2008 12:39 PM
I think the difficult part of a discussion like this is that it goes even deeper into the biology behind abortion. Most Pro-choicers believe an abortion kills a fetus, not a baby, therefore ending a pregnancy (typically prior to implantation). Most Pro-lifers believe abortion kills a human life that began as soon as the egg united with the sperm. Questioning the use of artificial birth control forces one to think about whether a life exists when the egg and sperm unite. That’s a difficult thing for some people to consider.
To further complicate things there are pro-lifers who don’t have a problem with artificial birth control and don’t feel they fit into other groups. The medical community is still studying the connection between BC and abortion so this isn’t a question that will be answered overnight. I think it is worth studying, even at the expense of being called nosy-women-hating fruitcakes.
(Above) – CORRECTION – ( “TYPICALLY AFTER IMPLANTATION”)
“So call yourself Buford, Amos, Clyde or Florence”
I’m going to call myself Elizabeth from now on!
“That first comment that was posted by Elizabeth was not me..the real Elizabeth..or the one that’s the single mom I guess I should say.”
AHHHHHHH what!!?! Now there are THREE Elizabeths!? I totally missed that post.
Elizabeth, 10:59 p.m.
How about you grow up and call yourself something different, even Elizabeth 2?
Well, Elizabeth, you could call yourself Elizabeth 2 and this would help get rid of the confusion. The other Elizabeth who doesn’t post here as much posts as Elizabeth S. or something like that. I’ve always posted as just Elizabeth
“Just like homosexuality is related to abortion.”
Huh?
“That first comment that was posted by Elizabeth was not me..the real Elizabeth..or the one that’s the single mom I guess I should say.”
That’s a relief, for a second there I thought you went crazy.
OK, I’ll bite. How is homosexuality related to abortion?
Hmm..no Jess..I’m still not crazy! (Depending on what your view is of crazy of course.)
I think I will change my name now to something else so people will know WHICH Elizabeth is posting. I don’t want to be confused with somebody else.
Oh yeah and on jaspers quote of the day, I think Tom Brady is a jerk who should at least be there for his son.
Elizabeth, why don’t you call yourself Jess? Or better yet, Elizabeth
Jess, 11:09 p.m.
I agree..he is a jerk and everytime I see him on tv playing it just annoys me.
I was Elizabeth 10:59, but not the first one. I
Darn the end of my sentenced was “raptured” again. Holy words Batman!
Jess
I’m the Jess with the hamsters. The Jess whose planning on sending you a bumper sticker soon.
Do I get a bumper sticker too Jess?
:-p
How are your ham-hams?
Do I get a bumper sticker too Jess?
:-p
How are your ham-hams?
Bloody ‘ell…sorry for the double post!
Yay for bumper stickers! I love em’!
Holy Crap. I am TOTALLY confused about the Elizabeths.
HALP?!
The ham-hams are great Rae! I had my baby sleep over the other night. It was fun getting to spend some time with Smoothie (the baby who lives with his dad, my bf) because he’s so different then Sandy. Sandy just likes to hang out on the couch with me, sit on my lap and watch tv but Smoothie needs to be constantly watched! He found holes in the couch I never knew existed : )
Sure, bumper stickers for everyone!
@Jess: Yay! That’s awesome. I hope I can get a kitty at my new place, but if they’re too allergic I’ll get a hamster or two. I love Dwarf ham-hams…
Well, Amanda, THIS is the Elizabeth who you are friends on facebook with! So I hope that helps. I think this will be my new name from now on because then hopefully it won’t be so confusing. I hope.
Sorry Elizabeth I’ll stop stealing your identity and the other fake Elizabeth (I think it was zeke) should do it too.
Rae, oh I have had four dwarfs : ) Pet shop owners say they all bite, but they’re lying. The best part about adopting any hamster is knowing you gave him or her a good home : )
BTW, I’m watching the pageant part of Little Miss Sunshine and I feel like a complete pedophile for just seeing it. Does anyone else feel this way when they see beauty pageants with such young girls being shown off like this?
Eek, all these people stealing my identity.
You could never pull this off. Hehehe.
@Jess: I love that movie! The music is soooooo gorgeous! But yes- beauty pageants with little girls like that creep me the hell out.
You wouldn’t be complaining if we were in your school, passing all your classes for you : (
I will NEVER be able to understand how a parent could dress up their pretty little girl in make up and mini cocktail gowns. They’re not even my kids and it makes me cringe.
I would venture to guess 90% of them would rather be running around on a playground in jeans and a baseball cap. You know…being…KIDS?
I’m feeling really, REALLY turned-off about the pro-life side of things right now.
X,
rest assured (and this is coming from a pseudo-pro choicer… or what ever you’d call someone who wants to eliminate abortion without making it illegal) the people who have caused you to feel this way represent the MOST extreme positions I’ve ever encountered. I mean, even within Jill’s supporters, who are often extremists, there are those on here who are even MORE extreme.
From my normal real life, outside of this board, I’d say people like Elizabeth, and you, are far more common (Thank the good Lord).
I’m feeling really, REALLY turned-off about the pro-life side of things right now.
Posted by: xalisae at June 8, 2008 12:15
What’s got you so down xalisae?
feeling strange because I seem to be in closer agreement with most of the pc’ers than pl’ers around here on the birth control issue.
Thank you, Amanda. That at least makes me feel a little better. :)
feeling strange because I seem to be in closer agreement with most of the pc’ers than pl’ers around here on the birth control issue.
Posted by: xalisae at June 8, 2008 1:05 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(Because you’re a closet Libertarian who wants everyone to keep their nose OUT of your gun case AND your uterus. It’s becoming a very popular viewpoint…)
Maybe, but I still don’t think that ending the growth process of a person once their blastocyst has implanted into the uterine lining should not be allowed by law. I really think that that person’s right to continue living superceeds any other rights which might be possessed by the owner of the uterus. It’s just a matter of priorities.
Bob Barr, the Libertarian candidate for president is also pro-life.
xalisae, NO worries. You have great love inside you for babies. Be true to yourself. You have a good heart and life is a journey. Youwill lead you to the right place.
corrections included:
xalisae, NO worries. You have great love inside you for babies. Be true to yourself. You have a good heart and life is a journey. You love will lead you to the right place
Laura, you never responded to my post the other day so I will post it again cause I would like clarify your post:
*********
Many responsible women choose abortion rather than pitch a less-than-“desireable” child into that nightmare system…
Posted by: Laura at June 1, 2008 1:07 AM
Laura, that is so sad. They feel so helpless that they actually decide to kill their baby’s before they are even born, “in order to protect them from society”. These mother’s need emotional counseling to help them understand that even “difficult” life is precious. We all go through difficult times in life and it is not acting irresponsibly to presume future difficultys as being a valid reason for killing her baby. Women often kill their newborns after birth for that same type of reasoning. Do you consider them to be responsible also?
that should’ve been “should be allowed by law”. Double negative fun! I’m tired. :(
Amanda,
The great majority of PC women say they are personally aginst abortion but they want it to remain legal. I struggle with how this can be the case and yet an estimated 40% of women commit abortion. Would you ever consider aborting a baby that you conceived through consentual intercourse?
I’m so tired I can’t see straight. But oh well. At least I’ve gained an appreciation today for people I was having trouble finding the good in. It definitely helped give me new perspective when I was starting to lose sight of the bigger picture. Goodnight, everyone, pro-life, pro-choice…people.
with corrections:
Laura, you never responded to my post the other day so I will post it again cause I would like clarify your post:
*********
Many responsible women choose abortion rather than pitch a less-than-“desireable” child into that nightmare system…
Posted by: Laura at June 1, 2008 1:07 AM
Laura, that is so sad. They feel so helpless that they actually decide to kill their baby’s before they are even born, “in order to protect them from society”. These mother’s need emotional counseling to help them understand that even “difficult” life is precious. We all go through difficult times in life and it “IS” acting irresponsibly to presume future difficultys as being a valid reason for killing her baby. Women often kill their newborns after birth for that same type of reasoning. Do you consider them to be responsible also?
“So call yourself Buford, Amos, Clyde or Florence”
Sigh. Rampant sexism rears its head once again. Three of the four names are male.
How are your ham-hams?
Whoa, Rae, Jess being a runner and all, I thought you were asking about her hamstrings.
TS – absolutely not.
“The great majority of PC women say they are personally aginst abortion”
I don’t see anything wrong with it or I wouldn’t defend it. But like any surgery it should be treated like such and prevention is the best policy.
People who are opposed to abortion and homosexuality and spend their time protesting against these things are like people who go to the beach and try to stop the tide with teaspoons. It’s that futile. You cannot stop these things. They will happen whether you approve of them or not. When will you social conservatives get it? I wish you would do something constructive for a change.
My wife and I used the pill. 4 out of our 5 kids were unplanned, not unwanted. It is very possible that we aborted numerous embryos without knowing it.
If we aborted embryos as a result of pill usage we are guilt of sin by omission not sin by commission and the Lord forgives. This was done out of ignorance not rebellion.
If we still had to use birth control, after reading these articles, we would change that in a heart beat.
So, I disagree that somehouw, the ban-the-pill issue alientates 98% of pro-lifers. No, the word should be educates.
My kids will now be hearing this from dad.
Thanks for posting this article as this stuff is not taught enough. Thank you my Catholic brothers and sisters.
Robert:
Waves were created by God at creation when he set the boundaries of the land and the sea and placed the moon in orbit around the earth and are therefore inexorable unitl the end of time. Wves are an expression of God’s will and serve numeropus purposes, one of which is to cleanse the ocean.
God is not the author of abortion or hoosexaulity are symbols of death and therefore are abominatios to Him. When He returns to rule with an iron sceptre, these, and all other aboiminations, anything that leads to death, will cease. Whether or not you believe this won’t change the inevitable.
In the meantime, God fearing pro-lifers will take literally the Lord’s prayer which begs for God’s will to be done here on earth as it is in heaven. You would do well to repent and do the same and not be found as a goat on Judgement Day.
?Wves are an expression of God’s will and serve numeropus purposes, one of which is to cleanse the ocean.”
Posted by: HisMan at June 8, 2008 12:15 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I spent hours yesterday just getting the duck poo and patio furniture out of my pool. Clean your own damn ocean.
“God is not the author of abortion or hoosexaulity”
Posted by: HisMan at June 8, 2008 12:15 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wasn’t Dr. Seuss the author of “Hoosexuality?”
Will they still happen if made illegal once again? Yes, most likely. However, my objection to such things has no basis in theology. I think it shouldn’t be allowed by law for the same reasons killing your newborn infant is not permitted by law. Terrible things happen all the time, illegal and legal, it doesn’t mean we should just condone, allow, and accept them.
Also, I’m a pro-lifer who has no problem with homosexuals. I’ve seen enough sham/just plain terrible traditional marriages on an Army base for 3 years to know that homosexuals can’t possibly mess things up any worse than they already are.
‘The Bible contains six admonishments to homosexuals and 362 admonishments to heterosexuals. That doesn’t mean that God doesn’t love heterosexuals. It’s just that they need more supervision.’
Lynn Lavner
Jess,
I got straight A’s this semester :) But thanks for the offer. I might let you take over my identity if you wanted to GO to the classes for me though. :)
Congrats Elizabeth G! Way to go! :)
?Wves are an expression of God’s will and serve numeropus purposes, one of which is to cleanse the ocean.”
Posted by: HisMan at June 8, 2008 12:15 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I spent hours yesterday just getting the duck poo and patio furniture out of my pool. Clean your own damn ocean.
“God is not the author of abortion or hoosexaulity”
Posted by: HisMan at June 8, 2008 12:15 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wasn’t Dr. Seuss the author of “Hoosexuality?”
Posted by: Laura at June 8, 2008 12:21 PM
Laura, You don’t miss a beat do you? Too funny!
I think HisMan meant “Waves”, not Wves or Wives, for that matter. :)
Robert:
I love the beach, I wish I were there!
Holy @%#$eroni, sorry about that. Moderators, please delete that post YIKES!
Doug, Look at that face! How sweet! Poster-size as well! :)
First ballet class:
Hi-There were always too many Elizabeth’s in little league soccer when I was little and it follows me to this day! I had no idea the level of confusion an frustration I was setting off by simply posting with my real name.
Anyway, hi, I posted the first comment. I rarely contribute but from now on I’ll try to remember to post under a less common name. I’ll just make something up when the time comes.
—
In regards to this issue: The pill was the precursor that led us into the mess we’re in with on demand abortion. It’s simple history. Anyone who takes the time to look up the history of abortion law and culture will easily realize this.
Elizabethwhopostedfirstonthisquestion,
If you were on a boat and you discovered that the boat had a hole and was filling up fast with water, which would you do first, plug the hole or empty the water?
I agree that contraception has led us to where we are today, but right now there’s a huge hole in the boat! Focusing on contraception is like emptying the boat with a thimble, while leaving the gaping hole.
Abortion is the more immediate danger. Once the hole is plugged we can focus on getting rid of the water.
And now imagine that there is a guy watching you thimbling out water while the hole is letting in a thousand times as much as you’re emptying. And you’re trying to convince him to grab a thimble. He’s gonna think you’re nuts. But if you ask him to help you plug the hole, and together you get the hole fixed, he’ll be a lot more likely to listen to you about the water situation. And a lot less likely to abandon ship altogether!
Trying to explain to him WHY you’re emptying the water is not going to convince him that you’re sane. Even tho you are right, the water must be emptied, it’s first things first.
I just feel that abortion is the more immediate problem…
Holy TuTu Doug,
Ballerina on steroids!!!!!!! takin’ care of it right now. Got my bottle of Alice in Wonderlands magic shrinking potion right heeeeeere…
Thank you, MK. Sigh… that was embarrasing.
Her father (my wife’s brother) and his wife both have big dark brown eyes, and Isabella has them too.
That picture was when she was all of four years old, and at the end of the class they had a recital. There’s a picture of her, with makeup on, crouching on the ground, lacing her slippers or whatever you call them up, and it’s sort of scary in a Jon-Benet Ramseyish way….
“Once the hole is plugged we can focus on getting rid of the water.”
Hole in the boat? Does anyone have a tampon?
I think it’s valid to look at our situation and see that we’d be most productive to point out to people that clearly ‘it’s a baby’ that’s being aborted.
I can only speak from my experience in college that when doing pro-life activism, the FIRST thing college peers wanted to know was what the ‘deal was with contraception.’
College students seemed to be able to see through to the crux of the situation.
I think it needs to be said too that some 50% of people who seek abortion were using contraception at the time that the baby was conceived. There is a mentality of entitlement that since the birth control ‘failed’ that abortion is suddenly justified.
We are also encountering a culture that has completely separated sexual intercourse from the possibility of new life. No, not every time someone has sex will a new life be present, but we’re living in a time where people are trying to completely void the possibility. When new life is conceived it is seen as a mistake.
Why is the new life seen as a mistake even though biologically we know that sex can lead to new life? The answer is simply that we have contraceptive mentalities- and further more, chemically contraceptive mentalities.
Therefore, it’s not only that the pill can act as an abortifacient, it also acts as a mental abortifacient.
If we are seriously dedicated to making abortion not only illegal but also unthinkable, we have to reverse the contraceptive mentality.
It’s certainly not going to happen overnight, but we can change the mentality by helping to educate our own children and family as well as our local parishoners etc. about the truth and beauty of an truly pure and authentic approach to human sexuality.
If we don’t get the root of the abortion culture than it will be like trying to get rid of weeds in our yard by only plucking the top of the weed. Instead we need to get rid of the root.
Elizabethwhopostedfirstonthisquestion,
lol…love the moniker!
btw..I love the name “Elizabeth”, so IMO, we can’t have too many!
First, I’d like to say “welcome”. I’m glad you decided to post!
Secondly, you’re right on the money with your 9:54pm post. I agreed with you in your first post but for reasons I just couldn’t put my finger on, which now I can.
While studying the number of abortions before and after the pill, I was astounded that the numbers actually skyrocketed AFTER the pill was introduced. Shouldn’t happen, right? But it did.
You’re right. It’s the mentality that needs to be fixed as well through education.
Again, thank you & WELCOME!
Jess, you’re delightfully wacky.
Hi JLM!
I think you should change your name to JLMNOP. Whad’ya think?
Janet,
What does that mean?
Oh, nevermind. I got it now. LOL!
Hi Janet!!!
JLM,
You’re right. “Elizabeth” is a fabulous name. :)
My mom always hated it that I would shorten it to “Liz” or something. She’d say, “I gave you that beautiful name and you shorten it.”
Gabriella’s Momma, how about some recent pictures of that daughter of yours?
Okay, Doug, I will put some up..gimme one sec.
This is from earlier in the week.
And here is both of us:
Ah, Gabriella is very cute. And I love her name too!
Have I mentioned lately how much I enjoy the fact that it seems most times people would rather just ignore most of the things I say because I don’t fit into their little mold? I really love that. Really.
“We are also encountering a culture that has completely separated sexual intercourse from the possibility of new life. No, not every time someone has sex will a new life be present, but we’re living in a time where people are trying to completely void the possibility. When new life is conceived it is seen as a mistake. ”
I have said, and there ARE other people who think as I do, there is ALWAYS a chance for EVERY contraceptive method to fail. If not, you would NEVER hear about people getting pregnant while taking or using contraceptives. But just because you take or use them doesn’t mean you aren’t open to new life. I don’t consider getting pregnant while using contraceptives a “mistake”. I just consider my kid to be lucky! But it’s great you can read minds though, so you know what every other person who takes contraceptives thinks. Good thing, too, because how else would you be so effective at judging them if you couldn’t?!
Sex is great. Sex for reasons other than procreation is great. Sex with practically no chance of conception is also great. Just out of curiosity, have you guys ever had an orgasm? If not, you really should, because I don’t think you’re qualified to get down on people using contraception (and who knows, it might improve your attitude) if you haven’t.
Terminating a pregnancy, which is what abortion is, which means killing a baby, is terrible. People who advocate contraceptives IS NOT EQUAL to people advocating abortion.
Also:
“While studying the number of abortions before and after the pill, I was astounded that the numbers actually skyrocketed AFTER the pill was introduced. Shouldn’t happen, right? But it did.”
Could it be that ABORTION WASN’T ILLEGAL AFTER THE PILL WAS LEGALIZED, THEREFORE THE NUMBER OF ABORTIONS ACTUALLY ABLE TO BE TABULATED INCREASED BECAUSE THE FEAR OF GOING TO PRISON/ETC. WAS GONE? C’mon, guys. Don’t be ignorant. I bet the number of people actually taking the pill went up after it was legal, too. If my eyes roll any more, they’re going to pop out of my head.
Thanks, Elizabeth. You and Gabriella are such babes.
Have I mentioned lately how much I enjoy the fact that it seems most times people would rather just ignore most of the things I say because I don’t fit into their little mold? I really love that. Really.
Xalisae, I don’t think most people ignore you. If anything I’d say there’s so much gut-basic truth from you about things and how you feel about them that it’d be tough to argue with.
There will still be plenty of argument, though, heh heh heh.
Well thank you, Doug. At least it doesn’t feel as though my shouts are falling on deaf ears now.
And now that I’m actually on a real computer, I can post this here, where it belongs:
About Edyt: I agree with ts on this one. Kinda. I usually can’t stand 9 out of 10 of the people I come across on a given day, but I still do my best to treat them as I would want to be treated, just because. But keep in mind, ts, that just because he thinks that right and wrong are purely subjective (I do myself, to a certain degree, but I think there are things which are just so far to one side within the spectrum of gray they ARE absolutes) doesn’t mean he would act in a manner unbecoming. You can be a moral relativist and still consistently act in a manner which would be considered highly moral by most people. So even when it IS black and white, it isn’t REALLY. Does that make sense?
“Thanks, Elizabeth. You and Gabriella are such babes.”
And I second that. You’re both absolutely beautiful. How old is she, btw? My daughter is turning 6 this August.
X,
I think sometimes people respond to your posts without actually addressing them to you. The whole contaception/are you really pro life debate that took place was because of your posts.
We’re listening. The other thing, at least for me, is that I usually wait to see if someone is sticking around before I get involved. I tend to invest my whole self with the people on here, and it’s frustrating when they leave after you’ve invested so much time.
I personally have addressed a number of things that you’ve said. I disagree with you on the use of contraception but I did say that I didn’t think it was any of my business. I’m sure you read the posts.
I just posted something to Elizabethwhopostedthefirstcomment saying that focusing on contraception was like bailing water out of a sinking boat BEFORE you plug the hole.
Maybe you need to read all of the comments and not just the ones that are addressed specifically to you?
And for the record, I don’t use contraception but have had plenty of orgasms…I understand the draw, I just disagree on the purpose of sex…
X,
I also posted quite a long comment on the fact that there are all kinds of prolifers and that not all of us are Christians. But that the two philosophies get mixed up a lot. Which leads people to believe that to be prolife you must be a Christian.
This is not true. We have a boatload of liberal minded, non religious pro lifers on here.
Pip, Alyssa, Rae, Eliabethwhodidn’tpostthefirstcommet, just to name a few. You really would have liked Hippie. And Mary. Perhaps you just focus on the Christian responses? It seems to me that A LOT of people backed your position. As a matter of fact, I think it was only Patricia who vehemently fought you on it.
Xalisae:
I think Doug hit the nail on the head, you make a lot of good points, many of which are hard to argue with! Sometimes people are busy; they read comments, but don’t have time to respond right away! So don’t stop writing! How long have you been at Jill’s? You are relatively new, right?
Sex is great. Sex for reasons other than procreation is great. Sex with practically no chance of conception is also great. Just out of curiosity, have you guys ever had an orgasm? If not, you really should, because I don’t think you’re qualified to get down on people using contraception (and who knows, it might improve your attitude) if you haven’t.
I don’t think there’s a correlation between the type of birth control used and orgasm/and or attitude about sex. I don’t think NFP users enjoy sex any less than users of other types of BC. I’ve never heard that idea before actually. Interesting! Is that a common thought among BC users about NFP’rs? That we don’t enjoy sex? Personally, I don’t know anyone who limits sexual intimacy to only the fertile times if that’s what you might be suggesting?
Terminating a pregnancy, which is what abortion is, which means killing a baby, is terrible. People who advocate contraceptives IS NOT EQUAL to people advocating abortion.
I think you know this already, I am in total agreement with you on this. If it weren’t true, we would never see families with the last baby ten years younger than his/her siblings! Lol. And something I have noticed about the “surprise” babies – they bring such joy to the rest of the family, they can’t imagine their family without that one! Now that is a testament to LIFE!
Oops! The second to last paragraph @ 9:25 should be in italics, attributed to xalisae.
Terminating a pregnancy, which is what abortion is, which means killing a baby, is terrible. People who advocate contraceptives IS NOT EQUAL to people advocating abortion.
Well, it just seems as though the ones I can find that speak specifically to what I said in the past will be, addressing like, 15% of the most easily misconstrued portion of what I actually said, with the rest just seemingly filtered out. And, I guess this debate is here because I suppose I’m a dissenter? I’m actually VERY glad though it didn’t end up shaping up to be what it appeared would happen otherwise, which just would’ve been: “PRO-LIFE/CONTRACEPTION IS BAD!” vs. “PRO-CHOICE/CONTRACEPTION IS GOOD!”. That’s not what this whole thing is about.
I have 2 kids, one was born this past January, so I don’t get much time on the internet these days. I use my phone browser as much as I can, but for some reason, after I’ve made so many posts on a particular thread with it, it stops letting me post, so I don’t blame you for not wanting to invest a lot of time in a debate which might not go anywhere for awhile, although I do try to address every post directed towards me with a rebuttal when I get the time.
“I just posted something to Elizabethwhopostedthefirstcomment saying that focusing on contraception was like bailing water out of a sinking boat BEFORE you plug the hole.”
I guess I can see that analogy, but I don’t agree with it, because I don’t think ALL the water is bad. Perhaps you could think of some of the water as being in tanks below the deck which helps prevent the boat from capsizing?
I read as many comments as I have time to, and remember as much to reply to as I can.
I agree that the attitude towards sex in society has become overly permissive, to say the least. Glorifying one-night-stands and random hook-ups with strangers is DEFINITELY not where we should be. But biologically speaking, like it or not, human beings are included in the roughly 3% of species for which the act of intercourse is pleasurable. I think we should be thankful for that, celebrate it when our lives put us in a position to do so with a long-term mate, and not look harshly upon those who see it as more than JUST making babies.
Yo yo yo!
xalisae: 8:28:I have said, and there ARE other people who think as I do, there is ALWAYS a chance for EVERY contraceptive method to fail. If not, you would NEVER hear about people getting pregnant while taking or using contraceptives. But just because you take or use them doesn’t mean you aren’t open to new life. I don’t consider getting pregnant while using contraceptives a “mistake”. I just consider my kid to be lucky!
I don’t understand your point about your kid being “lucky”. It seems contrary to the fact that you are using BC in the first place. If you conceived without BC, your statement would be clearer in my eyes. Can you elaborate?
“Pip, Alyssa, Rae, Eliabethwhodidn’tpostthefirstcommet, just to name a few. You really would have liked Hippie. And Mary. Perhaps you just focus on the Christian responses? It seems to me that A LOT of people backed your position. As a matter of fact, I think it was only Patricia who vehemently fought you on it.”
Well, I think it was Patricia and Cranky Cathlic (hope I got that name right), but the tone they set for the entire debate was less than ideal, and I hate to admit it, but I really am one to hold a grudge and keep a “fight fire with fire” attitude. Something I’m trying to work on! >_
X,
Thank you. Gabriella will be 2 1/2 in August. Oh man, we’re halfway to 3 almost. I reallllly have to work on her potty-training lol.
X,
Yeah, I hear you…the thing is, we each have the power to change any given tone, which in turn leads to more productive conversations.
But I do like your posts for the most part. We need voices from EVERY prolife warrior, no matter what their views on other issues are.
Wasn’t it Laura that commented about the SanFrancisco March for life…having every concievable walk of life being represented?
This singularly divisive issue has managed to unite some of the strangest befellows…Jews for Life, Catholics, Gays for Life, Feminists for Life…we’re all in it together.
It helps to remember tho, that abortion is the enemy…not the the people that are prochoice…
I’m assuming you’ll be sticking around? Shall I begin to invest??? lol
“I don’t think there’s a correlation between the type of birth control used and orgasm/and or attitude about sex. I don’t think NFP users enjoy sex any less than users of other types of BC. I’ve never heard that idea before actually. Interesting! Is that a common thought among BC users about NFP’rs? That we don’t enjoy sex? Personally, I don’t know anyone who limits sexual intimacy to only the fertile times if that’s what you might be suggesting?”
Well, it’s actually more an attitude I find many pro-choicers have about pro-lifers, and I can’t help but feel a negative attitude about contraception on our side only reinforces that myth, as does statements like “a more open attitude about sex/contraceptives enslaves women!”, which is patently false and implies a negative connotation of sex. And, one of the reasons I’ve seen NFP touted as better and I guess “less sinful” than other contraceptives, even to the point that some seem to get snippy when NFP is refered to as a “contraceptive method”, is that it’s not THAT effective at controlling conception, which was said to mean that NFP users were “more open to life”, but if that were the case, and it really were such a big deal to pass a fertilized egg, it seems that intercourse would be limited to times which would be most likely to ensure a fertlized egg’s implantation, not vice versa.
“I don’t understand your point about your kid being “lucky”. It seems contrary to the fact that you are using BC in the first place. If you conceived without BC, your statement would be clearer in my eyes. Can you elaborate?”
Well, if you’re using contraception, your chances of concieving are WAAAAAAaaaay less than not, so any egg to make it to fruition is really, really lucky. :P
Yes, I like it here, so I suppose I’ll make myself at home. :)
You really would have liked Hippie.
Did Hippie leave?
“Gabriella will be 2 1/2 in August. Oh man, we’re halfway to 3 almost. I reallllly have to work on her potty-training lol.”
Elizabeth, my boys weren’t potty trained until like 4 or almost 4. Thats a nice picture of you and your daughter.
x:946: Well, it’s actually more an attitude I find many pro-choicers have about pro-lifers, and I can’t help but feel a negative attitude about contraception on our side only reinforces that myth, as does statements like “a more open attitude about sex/contraceptives enslaves women!”, which is patently false and implies a negative connotation of sex.
This may not be your case, because you have a great husband. This idea that women may be enslaved may come from the fact that some men are sexually abusive and take advantage of the perception that they don’t need to be concerned about pregnancy. It is less about a negative attitude about sex and more about the reality that some men are abusive, or uncaring about what a woman wants.
And, one of the reasons I’ve seen NFP touted as better and I guess “less sinful” than other contraceptives, even to the point that some seem to get snippy when NFP is refered to as a “contraceptive method”, is that it’s not THAT effective at controlling conception,….
by “it’s” do you mean BC?
……which was said to mean that NFP users were “more open to life”, but if that were the case, and it really were such a big deal to pass a fertilized egg, it seems that intercourse would be limited to times which would be most likely to ensure a fertlized egg’s implantation, not vice versa.
This last part is complicated to answer and I’m short on time. If mk doesn’t get to it, I’ll try to later, It’s been nice talking to you!
“I don’t understand your point about your kid being “lucky”. It seems contrary to the fact that you are using BC in the first place. If you conceived without BC, your statement would be clearer in my eyes. Can you elaborate?”
Well, if you’re using contraception, your chances of concieving are WAAAAAAaaaay less than not, so any egg to make it to fruition is really, really lucky. :P
Posted by: xalisae at June 9, 2008 9:46 AM
I understand the egg is lucky, but if you’re on BC how do you also not see it as a mistake? Let me see…. I guess, because you’re willing to accept that a baby might happen, right? No abortion allowed, right? (It’s definitely not the way I would think the typical BC’r would think. But it’s to be commended!) Bye!
Let me see…. I guess, because you’re willing to accept that a baby might happen, right? No abortion allowed, right? (It’s definitely not the way I would think the typical BC’r would think. But it’s to be commended!)
Given that something like 97% of women use or have used contraception*, and that about half are pro-life (and even a lot of pro-choicers say they wouldn’t choose abortion for themselves), I think it is a much more common attitude than you realize.
Look at it this way: about 50% of babies conceived while the couple was using contraception** are aborted, which means that 50% aren’t. Obviously we have a lot of work to do to improve that figure, but it’s clear that it’s possible to have the mentality that you’ll accept a child who is conceived even if you’re using contraception. It’s even pretty common.
* Please don’t hold me to that exact figure :) , but it’s a very, very high percentage.
** Usually this is expressed as “used contraception during the month in which conception took place”, which seems to me like it leaves a lot of wiggle room. Like, if a couple used condoms some of the time, but not always, they would still be counted in this stat. So another area to work on would probably be correct and consistent use of contraception.
Are there links to any medical research or studies proving your position that the pill causes abortions? I have been trying to research this issue for several years now, but no one has ever offered any proof that this is the case. I’ve spoken with many Christian, pro-life doctors, one of whom is a family member of mine, and they have all told me basically the same thing: That the pill does not prevent implantation and that if breakthrough ovulation did occur, you’d be likely to get pregnant.
Sarah B:11:37:
As I’ve read more about this issue, I’ve come across the same opinions you have. That there is a possibility that the pill may cause abortions, but there is not conclusive evidence yet. This info. is included in the packaging of BC pills. There is another recent thread on this blog where this topic has also been discussed. You may find information there also.
Janet at 11:47:
I don’t really have a fully formed opinion on this issue, that’s why I’m here. =)
Thanks Jasper!
All of my friends who have kids who are about 2 are talking about starting potty training and how well their kids are doing it. I’m like “uhhh, yeah.” lol. I started it a while ago and she knows HOW to do it, it’s just a matter of getting her to do it every time she has to go to the bathroom. Or associating it with having to go to the bathroom I guess. I dunno. My mom tells me I was a really stubborn child to potty train. I hope that is not genetic.
Hisman wrote:
So, I disagree that somehouw, the ban-the-pill issue alientates 98% of pro-lifers. No, the word should be educates.
I agree completely with that statement!
I think that our stance against the pill only strengthens our cause, regardless of what pro-abortionists think.
Being against abortion, but not against the mindset which causes abortion (the mindset that says there is a wrong and a right time to have a child…the mindset that says that children can be a burden, etc.) doesn’t really make sense to me.
Children are not objects or our property, or burdens, yet society treats them this way. We should not. Our stance should reflect the polar opposite of this. They are gifts. They are people. They are *welcomed* as opposed to “wanted”. Our actions and lives should reflect this mindset.
xalisae wrote:
Well, if you’re using contraception, your chances of concieving are WAAAAAAaaaay less than not, so any egg to make it to fruition is really, really lucky. :P
If I am driving a car in the middle of the night, and I see something that could be a child standing in the road- but because it’s so dark, I don’t know for sure–I would never drive over it, even if I thought there was only a 1 percent chance that it was a child in the road.
In the same way, regarding the pill, since I found out the pill has the ability to cause abortions about almost two years ago, I could never now use birth control, knowing that there is a possibility that it could cause an abortion on my child. (Even if there is only a 1 percent chance it might happen.)
All of my friends who have kids who are about 2 are talking about starting potty training and how well their kids are doing it. I’m like “uhhh, yeah.” lol. I started it a while ago and she knows HOW to do it, it’s just a matter of getting her to do it every time she has to go to the bathroom. Or associating it with having to go to the bathroom I guess. I dunno. My mom tells me I was a really stubborn child to potty train. I hope that is not genetic.
haha, Elizabeth! I have to admit I get a bit jealous when another mom finds a way to potty train her child before the age of 3 1/2.
I tried with my first child, and tried with my second child. I went through countless hours of frustration trying to get them to go in the potty.
I finally gave up and realized they would figure it out at the age of 3 1/2, all of a sudden, with no help on my part. lol I remember doing a dance with my first son when he first went in the potty on his own.
So I guess I am content to keep changing diapers until that happens with my third child…much less frustrating!
I think you know this already, I am in total agreement with you on this. If it weren’t true, we would never see families with the last baby ten years younger than his/her siblings!
Hehe, that is SO not true.
My littlest brother is a little more than 10 years younger than me and my father had to reverse a vasectomy so they could get him. They almost stopped after me, actually, so there’s a 5 year difference between me and the closest little brother (he’s not so little anymore, he’s like 8 inches taller than me…damnit). People kept saying my parents had the perfect family – one boy, one girl. Then they realized they wanted a bigger family, and along came the rest. None of us were accidents. :)
Bethany,
She HAS gone on the potty..but I just don’t think she gets that she SHOULDN’T go in her diaper and only on the potty. That’s where the problem is I guess. Oh well, I’m really not going to stress about it because it’s not like she has to go to school or something and not pee her pants. I will probably just change diapers until she decides she sick of diapers lol. I appreciate you telling me that though..it makes me feel like I’m NOT a potty-training failure!
She HAS gone on the potty..but I just don’t think she gets that she SHOULDN’T go in her diaper and only on the potty. That’s where the problem is I guess.
Yep, I had that problem too, many times. It’s very difficult to get them to understand that. My daughter used to sit on the potty for a long period of time, then she would ask for a diaper, and immediately would poo in it. lol
I’m glad that knowing you’re not alone helped!
Yes, I like it here, so I suppose I’ll make myself at home. :)
Posted by: xalisae at June 9, 2008 9:49 AM
Good! Because I’m growing quite fond of you…
ERIN.
Good to “see” you again.
Hormonal contraception affects a woman’s body in 3 main ways:
1. Thickens cervical mucus, making it more difficult for sperm to swim to their destination.
2. Affects ovulation in such a way that fakes our your body into thinking it’s always pregnant.
3. Thins the lining of your uterine wall.
If conception occurs, the newly conceived life is unlikely to be able to implant into the wall of the cervix because by thinning out the lining it is now a ‘hostile’ environment.
Anyone interested in more about this topic should read “A Consumer’s Guide to the Pill” by John Wilkes. (buy it on Amazon).
It is worth reading regardless of your position on the issue.
if you rearrange the letters in “Elizabethwhopostedfirstonthisquestion” you can get:
Quintessential Frothiest Deb How So Hot Zip
Children are not objects or our property, or burdens, yet society treats them this way. We should not. Our stance should reflect the polar opposite of this. They are gifts. They are people. They are *welcomed* as opposed to “wanted”. Our actions and lives should reflect this mindset.
Bethany, the fact remains that not everyone is suited to having kids, ever or at a given time.
When considering pregnancy prevention, it’s “before the fact” of pregnancy, and it comes down to “do we wants kids or not (right now)” and sometimes the answer is no.
Doug, you are part of the society of which I was referring to, when I said that we pro-lifers should reflect the exact opposite of in our actions and mindset.
we pro-lifers should reflect the exact opposite of in our actions and mindset
Okay, B, your opinion, but you are then greatly decreasing your odds of success, i.e. being against pregnancy prevention while at the same time being against abortion is a position that will be seen as unacceptable to many more people than will be just being against abortion.
Okay, B, your opinion, but you are then greatly decreasing your odds of success, i.e. being against pregnancy prevention while at the same time being against abortion is a position that will be seen as unacceptable to many more people than will be just being against abortion.
Doug, a couple of years ago, I would have agreed with you. Once I realized the pill has not only 1 function, but 3, and one of those functions is to make the womb inhospitable to the already conceived baby, I decided I was wrong.
Also, the idea that I am decreasing my odds of success based on my belief that abortion is wrong, no matter how early, are simply your opinion, and nothing more. I have seen enough evidence to conclude that birth control has actually increased unwanted pregnancies, and not decreased them.
Bethany, I meant that you have less odds of achieving anti-abortion goals.
People see you as “pro-life” and against abortion, that is one thing.
People see you as, “I’m against abortion and also against preventing pregnancies,” and it’s a whole ‘nother ball game.
“The fact remains that not everyone is suited to having kids EVER or at a given time”
False reasoning; non sequiter, known as, In A Certain Respect And Simply to be exact. A asumption is carried to far.
This results from forming a dogmatic personality to affirm one’s own personal reasoning to never allow a sperm cell to do its job. Using absolutes of EVER and EVERYONE in a sentence reveals a “never doubt” mind condition. Dogma Doug assumes quite a bit in that statement and must know the reasons of every person he has not met and not created life. Quite God like. Or may you direct me to a scholor who would make a absolute statement concerning matters of reproduction and state in study that “EVERYONE is not suited to having kids EVER at a given time” ? Name of book, chapter,page, Dogma Doug?
Plus, a certain amount of self pre-destination is apparent in such thinking. Free will is destroyed in a attempt at being free of a natural reason for having a organ of the body, that is naturally meant to……..reproduce. Imagine a person seeking to deny the natural reason of the lungs or liver. The fact remains that not everyone is suited to having their lungs take in air, EVER or at a given time.
What reason would such a person give for not using their lungs ever or at a given time?
Let’s ask Dogma Doug that question.
BTW, Dogma Doug, did you answer my questions on this “sentience matter” and where it begins in physical matter? You know the neuron?
Bethany, I meant that you have less odds of achieving anti-abortion goals.
People see you as “pro-life” and against abortion, that is one thing.
People see you as, “I’m against abortion and also against preventing pregnancies,” and it’s a whole ‘nother ball game.
I’m not against preventing pregnancies, Doug. i’m against killing them after they are conceived.
“The fact remains that not everyone is suited to having kids EVER or at a given time”
yllas: False reasoning; non sequiter, known as, In A Certain Respect And Simply to be exact. A asumption is carried to far.
Wrong, yllas. It’s exactly correct. Some people are never suited to having kids, and many won’t be at a given time.
……
There’s nothing in what I said to violate any “never” or “always” rules or considerations, despite all your silly blathering.
EVERYONE is not suited to having kids EVER at a given time
If you think that, okay, but of course I said no such thing. You are so focused on loopy fantasies that you cannot face some logical truths.
I’m not against preventing pregnancies, Doug. i’m against killing them after they are conceived.
Okay, B, perhaps I misunderstood, where you said:
I think that our stance against the pill only strengthens our cause
Seems to me that being against birth control pills will be seen as counter-productive, at the least, versus being against people having abortions.
yllas: did you answer my questions on this “sentience matter” and where it begins in physical matter? You know the neuron?
Allow me one response in kind.
Fruitcake, yes.
53 hours ago.
Pills don’t kill (it isn’t alive, it’s preborn, remember).
Dogma Doug.
What is this “rules of consideration”? A defintion would be appropriate. I quoted you exactly, word for word,(post at 6;49,June 10) and the proof is right above you Dogma Doug.
Now, in your reply to me you change your statment to “SOME people are NEVER suite to having kids….”(12;16pm, june11) Now, Now, Dogma Doug, that is not the same as the statement you wrote at 6;49,june10.
Which statement is the one your going to go with Dogma Doug, as one is a absolute statement with no Some, maybe, or possibles, in your statement about human reproduction?.
You wrote a fallacious statement, and now,, try in your mind, to back away from it by actually trying to change your statement/quote in a answer to me. Amazing.
Your statement is a non sequiter, a assumption carried to far. When a person trys to correct a fallacous statement by you Dogma Doug, you change the statement!!!! That is a totally, absolutly intellectual fraud your trying to perpetrate upon yourself first, and me, Dogma Doug.
How many people have you foisted that intellectual fraud upon Dogma Doug? Do you really believe that a answer to a reply concerning a direct quote of you Dogma Doug, is answered by changing what you wrote, is a truthful and logical answer? I am quoting a sentence you wrote at 6;49 june10, and your reply is to answer that quote with some other statment that suddenly includes a qualifying word(SOME) that removes the non sequiter within the statement.
Your dogmatic, closed mind has gone so far into NEVER being able to admit a logical error in EVEN one declarative statement. But, that is how truth is sacrificed to a personal dogma.
The fact remains, you wrote a declarative statement which was fallacous. If you had included “some” in the declarative statement, you would have been logically correct.
You didn’t, and added to your logical error by adding more errors through the fallacy of distraction and a fraudulent answer where the statement is changed. You wrote it Dogma Doug, and own the declarative statement that reveals your dogmatic mind, built upon personal reasons, and a lack of logical truth.
Seems to me that being against birth control pills will be seen as counter-productive, at the least, versus being against people having abortions
I don’t think there really is a “vs” in this situation. It’s all the same to me.
It’s a matter of education, rather than ‘abortion vs contraception’, when it comes to the BCP. I did not know, 2 years ago, that the pill had a third function which was to kill the child who had already been conceived. I was simply not aware of the fact that it could indeed be an abortificant. If I had known, I would have NEVER taken it. I know there are so many women today who will be outraged when they find out that they have been taking something that is potentially abortive.
I know that there are millions of women today who still have no idea this is the case, or, if they have heard about it, may not believe it just yet. I think that women have a right to know what they’re putting in their body!
RU486 and the pill are not so different, in my opinion. The only difference is that the FIRST function of RU486 is to abort the child…with the pill it is the THIRD function. Do you see what I am saying now?
Since I believe that human life begins at conception, of course I believe that taking the pill would be wrong, if it has a function intended to kill human life.
As for your answer to sentience and the neuron.
You don’t know, is all you know, Dogma Doug.
You build your logic upon the killing of human beings from not knowing,don’t know, where response to or conscious of sense impressions(definition of sentient) actually orginates in a human being.
Question. Since a human being is not sentient while sleeping, may you abort/kill that human being? Yes or No.
yllas: I quoted you exactly, word for word
Yeah, and I was right:
“The fact remains that not everyone is suited to having kids EVER or at a given time”
I did not know, 2 years ago, that the pill had a third function which was to kill the child who had already been conceived. I was simply not aware of the fact that it could indeed be an abortificant. If I had known, I would have NEVER taken it. I know there are so many women today who will be outraged when they find out that they have been taking something that is potentially abortive.
Bethany, okay – that is understandable, but the fact remains that to be against abortion yet also against pregnancy prevention – birth control – will be seen at outlandish, etc., by vast numbers of people.
I’m not saying you’re “wrong” to feel as you do, just that as far as achieving the banning or further restriction of abortion you’re establishing a position that is much less likely to be accepted as a good reason for doing so.
yllas: You don’t know, is all you know
:: laughing ::
Heh – and you don’t then know anything. I acknowledge what we do know, and what we do not. With you everything is fake pretense. Have it your way.
Your statement at 7;20 is a fallacious statement. Think Dogma Doug. EVERYONE is all people. You don’t know what ALL/EVERYONE does,will do, or has done “at a given time”. Or do you? It is a absolute statement with no qualifications within the declarative statement.
Question. Is your statement at 7;20 100% factual truth? If it is, then you know ALL thoughts, purposes/reasons/actions for ALL people, who have NEVER whispered a word to you about “N(EVER)” were/are/will be
“suited to having a kid ” at a GIVEN TIME. When time “was given” to a caveman, were you there Dogma Doug? Have you been astral traveling with oldhippies, that are unrepentant, and asked ALL and EACH cavemen if they meet the requirements of(suited) of “having kids EVER”?
That is a hugh assumption to make Dogma Doug about EVERY and EACH person who has,had, or will exist.
.
I swear, you don’t know the definition of everyone do you, Dogma Doug, through lack of definition, or your playing the fool by reason of “missing the point” twice. And the prediction is for you, Dogma Doug, playing the fool three times, given the time of you missing the point, twice before. It’s absolutely guaranteed.
EVERY; constituting EACH and ALL members of a group.Houghton Mifflin.
EVER; at ALL TIMES. a). at ANY TIME. Houghton Mifflin
.
Translation; NOT ALL and EACH of human beings meet/met the requirements(suited) of having kids at ALL /any times(EVER), or at a given time. REALLY? How ALL knowing of you Dogma Doug.
You assume way to much, Dogma Doug. It’s that simple, but your dogmatic mind, can’t admit writing one fallacious statement.
Ah, Dogma Doug,
Question. Since a human being is not sentient at a given time, asleep, may you abort/kill that human being? Yes or no?
Question. If a person is not sentient, through the action of sleep, is that person NOT a person possesing personhood at that given time of sleep?
Remember the definition of sentient is;having sense perception,conscious.
BTW, you have no idea of why a Christian says that he is made in the “image of God” do you?
What are the basic properties of the Christian God? Has it EVER been explained to you?
It has to do with the problem of non living matter being able to be sentient, or self aware of itself.
And to be truthful, I don’t think you know why Christians have a trinity of three persons in one nature.
Question. Can love actually exist in isolation? YES or NO, Dogma Doug. A simple question that is easily answered by any rational human being.
How you answer will reveal more about yourself then you know Dogma Doug. And it might explain your deep seated desire to (N)EVER reproduce from seeking love in isolation and then making hugh assumptions about ALL human beings and their requirements to EVER have kids. In fact, no God thought of before was made from love and the problem of love existing in total isolation. All creation myths lacked a logic for existence from physical matter that is built upon totally unaware, not sentient, physical matter .
St. Augustine offers a more philosophical defintion of the Christian God.
But, let’s probe the knowledge of a person raised in a God that pre-ordained murder of his own creation, from time beginning, to time ending.
Answer the questions Dogma Doug.
Bethany, okay – that is understandable, but the fact remains that to be against abortion yet also against pregnancy prevention – birth control – will be seen at outlandish, etc., by vast numbers of people.
So you believe I should base my morals on what the majority believes at any given moment?
Doug, if the entire world thought that rape was acceptable, I would stand against it and say it was wrong.
I’m not saying you’re “wrong” to feel as you do, just that as far as achieving the banning or further restriction of abortion you’re establishing a position that is much less likely to be accepted as a good reason for doing so.
I’m not working to ban the pill at the moment. I’m working to ban abortion first. The pill can come later, when more people have been educated to understand how it works.
yllas: Your statement at 7:20 is a fallacious statement.
No it’s not, and you’re just playing stupid.
I didn’t make an untrue statement about everybody. What I said was:
“The fact remains that not everyone is suited to having kids EVER or at a given time.”
If I said that nobody is ever suited… or I said that everybody isn’t suited… then you’d have a case. I didn’t, though, and you don’t.
You could restate it as “some people” (i.e. not everybody) are not ever suited to having kids, and some people are not suited to having them at a given time.
So you believe I should base my morals on what the majority believes at any given moment?
No, Bethany, I was just saying that if you include the notion that “birth control is bad” in your platform, far fewer people will really support it, think it reasonable, etc. I’m not saying you should or shouldn’t do anything.
“I’m against rape” – no significant argument about it.
“I’m against abortion” – lots of disagreement, but many people on your side, certainly.
Adding in “birth control is bad” will take away a lot of those people. Not saying you “should” believe differently, etc., but as far as wanting change in laws, etc., there are practical matters to contend with.
I understand everything you’ve said here – it just struck me as odd that somebody would be against abortion and also against birth control.
yllas, you’re chasing your own tail, trying to bite my ankles.
Question. Since a human being is not sentient at a given time, asleep, may you abort/kill that human being? Yes or no?
First of all, in no way is a sleeping person necessarily “not sentient.” What opinion of “may” are you talking about? The law does not say that being asleep means that the right to life is no longer attributed (of course).
……
Question. If a person is not sentient, through the action of sleep, is that person NOT a person possesing personhood at that given time of sleep?
Again, being asleep does not mean “not sentient.” Being awake and being sentient are not necessary for the attribution of personhood, either. Once personhood has been deemed to be there, going to sleep does not alter it.
No, Bethany, I was just saying that if you include the notion that “birth control is bad” in your platform, far fewer people will really support it, think it reasonable, etc. I’m not saying you should or shouldn’t do anything.
Okaay…well, that’s just a chance I’m willing to take then, Doug.
“I’m against rape” – no significant argument about it.
“I’m against abortion” – lots of disagreement, but many people on your side, certainly.
Again, it seems to be your implication here that the majority belief should be what I go by to decide what I support or do not support.
Adding in “birth control is bad” will take away a lot of those people.
See, you advice here is basically “other people might not like or understand your message, so you should change it.”
Not saying you “should” believe differently, etc., but as far as wanting change in laws, etc., there are practical matters to contend with.
That’s your opinion, and I simply disagree, Doug. I disagree that I am damaging my side by standing against birth control pills. Time will tell.
I understand everything you’ve said here – it just struck me as odd that somebody would be against abortion and also against birth control.
I already explained it to you, Doug. I’m not against preventing pregnancy, I’m against killing what is already conceived. Why is it odd to be against a pill that can be abortive, if I’m against abortion? Would it not be more contradictory for me to be in support of one type of abortion, yet non supportive of another form of abortion?
I’m not against preventing pregnancy, I’m against killing what is already conceived. Why is it odd to be against a pill that can be abortive, if I’m against abortion? Would it not be more contradictory for me to be in support of one type of abortion, yet non supportive of another form of abortion?
Bethany, I do understand that. Yet we’re talking about birth control pills which, while you say they “can be abortive,” are primarily for preventing pregnancy in the first place.
From your point of view, in an idealized scenario, yeah – no conceived life would ever end like that, while in practice birth control pills prevent huge numbers of abortions.
….
I disagree that I am damaging my side by standing against birth control pills. Time will tell.
Indeed – I guess this is one area where we ain’t gonna agree.
Bethany, I do understand that. Yet we’re talking about birth control pills which, while you say they “can be abortive,” are primarily for preventing pregnancy in the first place.
From your point of view, in an idealized scenario, yeah – no conceived life would ever end like that, while in practice birth control pills prevent huge numbers of abortions.
I disagree that they prevent huge numbers of abortions. Since the pill became more widespread, we have seen an ever increasing number of abortions. Like I said before, it’s about the contraceptive mindset. The mindset Pro-lifers should stand against. Abortion is a clear result of the contraceptive mindset.
Indeed – I guess this is one area where we ain’t gonna agree.
But it ain’t the only area we ain’t gonna agree. lol
Ha! Right you are, B.