Porn publisher Larry Flynt on Trig Palin, who he calls “It”
UPDATE 5/29, 10:05a: As reported by LifeNews.com and The Blaze, Flynt is not backing down from his comment. He wrote on Twitter May 27:
What I said is true. She knew that baby was Downs Syndrome. If she thought it would be something heroic or courageous to have this child, it’s her decision but I think she’s an idiot. I’m not ashamed of my statement.
5/28, 8:25a:
Sarah Palin is the dumbest thing. But I made a fortune off of her. [He made a porn film called Nailin’ Palin, based on her]….
She did a disservice to every woman in America. She knew from the first month of pregnancy that kid was going to be Down’s Syndrome. It’s brain dead. A virtual vegetable. She carries it to all these different political events against abortion, she did it just because she didn’t want to say she’d had an abortion. How long is it going to live? Another 12, 15 years? Doesn’t even know it’s in this world.
So what kind of compassionate conservative is she? I don’t think anybody will want her near the White House.
~ Hustler magazine publisher Larry Flynt, as quoted in The Independent, May 27
[HT: Kelli; photo via The Independent]
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.
If intelligence is based off appearances alone, I would say that Larry Flynt is the one who looks brain dead here. How sad that this man has to bully a small child because he can’t be happy with his own self.
This statement is so vile, disgusting and evil that I think this post should be withdrawn. Any press for this evil man is just wrong.
That is one of the most offensive things that I have ever read. This man is void of character so it shouldn’t surprise us. He has been billions off of exploiting women and now he makes disabled children his target. He is obscene~
It is amazing to me that in this day and age someone could be so completely ignorant about Down Syndrome. What a hateful little man.
Can you imagine having this hateful statement and lifelong hatred of women as your legacy?
He embodies a life in dire need of redemption and our glorious savior!
Pray he repents before it’s too late!
Jill:
Thanks for this tip. I clicked on “The Independent” to read the entire article. It was a difficult read. . .there wasn’t one paragraph that didn’t turn my stomach, but I recommend it for anyone who hasn’t got a clue about pornography and those who defend the right to produce it. Larry Flint is a criminal in more ways than anyone could imagine! It is shocking to see the sampling of his legacy in one article! And our permissive society has let him get away with it. So what does that say about our culture?
I cannot imagine anyone getting away with what he has done except that he does it all in the name of “sexual freedom” — his ticket for a free pass. Liberals will even let him get away with the quote he made about the Obamas which appears just before his quote about Trig Palin. Please do not take down this link as a prior commentor suggested. The truth isn’t always pretty, but we MUST be made aware of it. Perhaps this article will shake the sleeping souls of some who still are not on our side.
I have always said that a birth control/abortion/sexual freedom culture is one that continues to enslave women, not free them. Larry Flint is the epitome of that reality.
Clearly this man has never met any adults with Down’s Syndrome. There’s a guy who sometimes works at a local grocery in my area. Not only is he perfectly self-aware (Not even knowing he’s in the world? What? Really what?), but he’s one of the sweetest and most considerate people I’ve ever had the good fortune to meet.
Either that, or Flynt is just a jerk, which–given his comments–is probably more likely.
His words about individuals with Down Syndrome are inaccurate and just represents more ignorance and prejudice towards the developmentally disabled, based on old-fashioned pre-conceptions, ignorance, stereotypes, and probably little to no interaction with such individuals. One of the best things we can do is to provide factual information to promote awareness and educate the general public.
Learn About Down Syndrome
http://mylifeinreflection.blogspot.com/2010/05/down-syndrome.html
CDAC
http://www.cdadc.com/ds/
Offers scientific research, information, education, and suuport to parents and families of children with Down Syndrome as well as awareness and education for the medical professionals and the general public. Written by parents of a child with Down Syndrome.
National Down Syndrome Society
http://www.ndss.org/
Offers advocacy, outreach, education, and support and resources for families, parents, and medical professionals. Helpline: 1-800-221-4602
SOFT
http://www.trisomy.org/
Support Organization for Families of Trisomy, a nonprofit volunteer organization offering support for parents who have had or are expecting a child with a chromosome disorder and education to families and professionals interested in the care of these children.
Hidden Treasures: The Trisomy 21 Journey
http://hiddentreasuresthet21journey.blogspot.com/
Parents from all around the world share their stories.
Video: Dreams
Dreams features children and adults who have Down syndrome talking about their dreams and what they’re proud of in their lives. This fun and inspirational video made by Scott and Julia Elliott celebrates the work of the National Down Syndrome Society and the larger Down syndrome community.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_-P4t2jR1g
And people don’t believe in hell…
How strange that this man, who is disabled and in a wheelchair, should call another human being an “it.” I’m sure that’s how some people feel about him.
Did anybody ever actually look at Hustler? I did, out of curiosity (it was my brothers’s copy, he is really into porn). After wards, I felt like taking a shower. He had a cartoon of a woman’s body fed into a meat grinder. And he also has racist stuff in there, like a cartoon of a black woman having sex with a cockroach.
How can anyone defend this guy? I don’t believe in censorship, but this is some vile stuff.
And he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Down Syndrome is not some kind of terminal disease. Many people with it live into their sixties.
I have met many Down Syndrome kids and I think that they are delightful! They have such an innocence about them. It make me think that they are God’s way of showing us non-Downs people how jaded and mean we can be compared to the Downs child. Larry Flynt is to be pitied because whatever brain he does have is not a happy one compared to the brain of a Down’s child.
Larry Flynt is a very unhappy and angry man. He doesn’t like children and he doesn’t like women. I think he is pathetic.
What a disgusting, ignorant, misogynistic excuse for a human being.
@Phillymiss,
Fortunately, I’ve never read Hustler, and after reading your comment, it will be a cold day in hell before I do.
Phillymiss,
I really hope that the woman involved with your brother right now (if he is in a relationship) knows full well his addiction and is running, not walking away.
Mods,
Please review and approve my comment in moderation, thanks!
The more I think about this man, the more disturbed I get. I read the whole article, and let’s just say that Mr. Flynt has more problems than we could possibly imagine. He claims to have lost his virginity to a chicken and he was brutally molested as a teenager by an older man. He is a very, very lost man in need of prayer. Sadly, he has led many a young woman to suffering. Sin sure likes to spread.
I agree with you, Valerie — people DO need to read it. The man comes across as a complete sociopath — incapable of feeling empathy or fear.
And did anybody else notice how he said that the Obamas had a stable marriage “even though they’re Black”! What a total bigot! But because he champions loathsome pornography, nobody on the Left is gonna call him on that. What an appalling thing to say!
And then he said he provides pornography to keep men from strangling hookers in alleys. He doesn’t even think much of men, does he? Projection, anybody?
He doesn’t just dehumanize women, or Blacks, or people with disabilities. He dehumanizes EVERYBODY.
Pray for him. The Holy Spirit is truly his only hope. And as much as he made life on earth a hell for so many people, Jesus came to save the lost. And in a way, spiritually, Larry Flint is truly “the least of these”.
Leslie he’s heard the gospel and even “converted” once. He’s an unrepentant hellbound sinner, who loves his sin, exploits whorish women and now attacks small special needs children. I personally don’t believe there is any hope for him…
I think all those who hate people with Down Syndrome need to read this article:
http://kids.nationalgeographic.com/kids/stories/peopleplaces/downsyndrome/
It’s written for children, but sometimes it’s adults who need the lesson.
Well now we know who Larry skynFlynt will not be supporting in the 2012 presidential race.
I can’t wait to find out the name of the unfortunate recipient of skynFlynt’s largesse.
skynFlynt : a person who would save, gain, or extort money by any means.
a miser.
Lana,
I deleted your comment.
TMI about your sex life.
“His [skynFlynt’s] head is barely able to look up at mine [Johann Hari], and his hand is barely able to reach up to shake mine.”
I hope Johann Hari was wearing prophylactic gloves and used copious amounts of Purell to disinfect his hands after the encounter with skynFlynt.
Harri’s description of skynFlynt remind me of a character from C. S. Lewis’ 3rd book in the ‘Space Trilogy’, ‘That Hideous Strength’.
[Can’t wait til someone makes a movie from this trilogy.]
In the book scientists have preserved just the head of a criminal genius who was executed by decapitation and are hoping to glean prolonged wisdom from the severed cranium.
This is the opinion of a single, deranged, bigoted man…one that does not reflect the feelings or thoughts of Liberals, nor the Pro-Choice movement.
With the exception of this statement:
Sarah Palin is the dumbest thing.
Thats dogma among libs and choicers.
“one that does not reflect the feelings or thoughts of Liberals, nor the Pro-Choice movement.”
Are you sure about that? Do a quick google search for “Sarah Palin” and “Down Syndrome”
It’s disgusting the things that people say about her son, and all children with DS.
He’s as crass as you’d expect the man responsible for Hustler magazine to be, but he’s not entirely wrong, is he?
Joan, he is 100% completely and totally wrong. The fact that you think that anything he said has any sort of validity just proves my point that he does, in fact, represent both liberalism and the pro-choice movement.
Be specific, Joan.
Where was he correct?
Larry Flynt speaks for himself, not any movement. That said, I do believe there is validity in his words, expressed in a very coarse way that most people can’t seem to get past. Sarah Palin does use her infant son as a political prop. She does use him to make “pro-life” political statements. And he most certainly lacks any serious measure of the self-awareness that is part of our social and personal identities. In my opinion, it is an act of cruelty to knowingly bring something like that into the world.
I found ‘That Hideous Strength’ on-line in pdf format.
http://arthursbookshelf.com/sci-fi/lewis/c.%20s.%20lewis%20-%20that%20hideous%20strength.pdf
Here are some excerpts:
“There, on the back page of the newspaper, was the head she had seen in the nightmare : the first head (if there had been two of them)—the head of the prisoner. She took up the paper. EXECUTION OFALCASAN was the headline, and beneath it, SCIENTIST BLUEBEARD GOES TO GUILLOTINE.
She remembered having vaguely followed the case. Alcasan was a distinguished radiologist in a neighbouring country—an Arab by descent, they said—who had cut short a brilliant career by poisoning his wife.”
“And then,” said Jane, “all three of them stood in front of the Head. They bowed to it. You couldn’t tell if it was looking at them because of its dark glasses. Then it spoke.”
“In English?” said Grace Ironwood.
“No, in French.”
“What did it say?”
“Well, my French wasn’t quite good enough to follow it. It spoke in a queer way. With no proper expression.”
“But it is very easy,” said Filostrato. “We have found how to make a dead man live. He was a wiseman even in his natural life. He live now forever: he get wiser.”
“The Head has sent for you. Do you understand—the Head? You will look upon one who was killed and is
still alive. The resurrection of Jesus in the Bible was a symbol: to-night you shall see what it symbolised. This is real Man at last.”
“God?” said Mark. “How does He come into it? I don’t believe in God.”
“But, my friend,” said Filostrato, “does it follow that because there was no God in the past that there will be no God also in the future?”
“Don’t you see,” said Straik, “that we are offering you the unspeakable glory of being present at the creation of God Almighty?”
“It tells us,” said the Director, “that if this technique is really successful, the Belbury people have for all practical purposes discovered a way of making themselves immortal. It is the beginning of what is really a new species—the Chosen Heads who never die. They will call it the next step in evolution. And henceforward all the creatures that you and I call human are mere candidates for admission to the newspecies or else its slaves—perhaps its food.”
”
Sarah Palin does use her infant son as a political prop. She does use him to make “pro-life” political statements. And he most certainly lacks any serious measure of the self-awareness that is part of our social and personal identities”
She has her young child with her while working. She doesn’t “use” him any more than Obama “used” his daughters during the ’08 campaign. She doesn’t hide him away, though if she did I’m sure you’d attack her for being “ashamed” of him. She can’t win.’
As for him lacking self-awareness, you are couldn’t be more wrong. Individuals with Down Syndrome are most certainly self aware. In fact, they are often more aware of the feelings of themselves and others because they are often blessed with higher than average emotional intelligence. Their cognitive delays are best described as “mild to moderate”. Many individuals with Down Syndrome live on their own, get married, go to college, and work to support themselves.
http://www.ndss.org is a good place to start educating yourself. Your ignorance is astounding.
Taylor says: May 28, 2011 at 12:57 pm
“This is the opinion of a single, deranged, bigoted man…one that does not reflect the feelings or thoughts of Liberals, nor the Pro-Choice movement.”
====================================================================
skynFlynt is amoral. That is one of the primary tenets of humanism. Everyone decides for themselves what is good or bad.
It is the same gospel liberals proclaim with evangelistic zeal.
A rejection of the standards of the past with an accompanying embrace of the post modern perspective.
skynFlynt is more intellectually honest about his philosophy/idiotology than most humanists.
He is not running for political office, he can afford to be and everyone knows ‘old age’ has the advantage of being able to be blunt with no consideration for the consequences.
But even for a sated old lech like skynFlynt there are some social convention even he is afraid to confess to having violated. Like havings sex with your adolecent daughter and/or marrying your adult daughter.
You have to read all of Harri’s interview with skynFlynt to get the full picture.
skynFlynt is the epitomy of the new man to which liberal progressive humanists ascribe.
I will give skynFlynt his due. He is not a hypocrit like his lesser liberal progressive colleagues.
Joan,
As in bringing Trig into the world?
The greatest sin:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEa_RkzMQOI
No disability is worse than being born without a soul, Joan.
My condolences.
Do you want to tell these children that they should have been killed?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvoKTDMhpVs
Do they look like they’re suffering to you?
The moment I read Flynt’s disgusting comments, I said to myself, “I bet joan will support him,”
Lo and behold. . .
Joan,
Have you ever actually met an individual with Down Syndrome?
And once again, Joan with the help of Larry Flynt this time, reveal the true heart of the pro-choice/liberal side of things. It’s truly hideous. Thank you.
LOL, Lori, P….exactly!
People like Larry flynt – and Joan – don’t see Down’s syndrome people and others as human because of their atheism. It’s ironic he thinks of himself as human, even though he has to be in a wheel chair and have a body guard. No doubt, Joan has faults and weaknesses of her own.
I know several families with Down’s syndrome children – both adopted and natural born – and they are generally very delightful children who are utterly compassionate and well behaved - – far from being vegetables, and far better than a lot of the spoiled, able-bodied children you see in stores or in schools (a lot of whom are medicated just to get them to sit still in a chair).
I’m not sure how Trig Palin is a drain on society, seeing how he is not supported by taxpayer dollars, unlike a lot of able-bodied adults. I worked with an atheist once. One of the ladies in our office was a wonderful co-worker but terribly overweight. The atheist wanted her desk arranged in such a way that she didn’t even have to look at our overweight co-worker. She said just looking at the woman made her sick. What a sad individual.
As Tony Evans said one time, “Don’t be surprised when sinners sin. It’s what they do. It’s in their job description.”
I love this video….beautiful words by Sarah Palin talking about her precious boy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUk817zUYuU&feature=player_embedded
People like Larry flynt – and Joan – don’t see Down’s syndrome people and others as human because of their atheism.
Please retract this statement. The greatest job I had in my lifetime was working at a school for children with disabilities while being an atheist.
Being devoid of empathy or compassion for fellow human beings is not a trait exclusive to atheists.
I know many very nice atheists, some are very pro life. Also, Tiller claimed he was a Christian and killed thousands, some of whom were probably Downs Syndrome. He killed a Downs Syndrome mom. Larry Flynt is more likely just a sociopath.
Thank you, hippie. *hearts*
Yes, just because someone is an unbeliever doesn’t mean they’re a bad person. Remember that one of the most eloquent defenders of life is Nat Hentoff, a “stiff-necked Jewish atheist.”
@Carder– my brother is fifty years old and set in his ways. He used to tell me about his favorite porn stars and their various “specialties” but I told him in very clear terms that I didn’t want to hear it, so he knows how I feel about the issue.
@Joan – unbelievable that someone who prides herself on being well-educated would say that Down Syndrome people are not self-aware. There is a program (I forget what it’s called) that pairs developmentally disabled people with couples. They live with the families and are part of the community. I had a client who had Down Syndrome who was married. He and his wife enjoyed the same things that “normal” people do — watching television, going shopping, eating out, having a beer, hanging out with friends. I think if you actually met some Down Syndrome people you wouldn’t feel this way.
This is so grotesque it almost sounds like Larry Flynt is working for Sarah Palin. It can’t help but generate sympathy for her.
Has his experience as a handicapped individual taught him nothing? He is incredibly heartless toward a child who is handicapped.
What do you expect people? This guy “earns” (and I use the term loosely) his living in an industry that degrades women and children, and treats them as sex objects. He obviously has no love for women or children. Why are we surprised when he shows himself to be completely lacking in sensitivity and compassion? This creep just shows us what those who hate the habdicapped are really like.
Cecilia, I don’t think I would be so upset if it were just his opinion, but the fact of the matter is that there are tons of people (see Joan) who feel exactly the same way.
In my opinion, it is an act of cruelty to knowingly bring something like that into the world.
Wow, Joan, I wondered if you’d comment on this one, and you didn’t disappoint.
Something. FYI, Trig Palin is a PERSON. He’s a 3 year old child, and he’s a human being. Not a thing. Not an it.
I’ve found over the course of my life while working with the disabled that usually it’s not they who are deficient. It’s people like you and Larry Flynt.
I think everyone is missing the point. He wasn’t attacking Trig, he was making commentary on Sarah Palin’s use of Trig for personal political gain. She exploits that baby every chance she gets. And I think he’s right on that point.
I preferred Flynt when he played Jabba the Hutt in the Star Wars movies. You could at least choose not to read the subtitles with his words.
Yeah, Lita, I know I refer to all my friends as “ brain dead. A virtual vegetable.”
Clearly these are accurate terms implying respect for the individual, right?
Lita, I think you’re missing the point. Flynt repeatedly refers to Trig as an it. “It’s brain dead. A virtual vegetable . . . doesn’t even know it’s in this world.”
He may be speaking against Sarah Palin, but he’s also calling her child less than human. Why shouldn’t a mom bring her son to work with her in order to spend more time with him? Show me a politician who doesn’t show off their family sometimes.
If Trig isn’t worthy to be considered a person, why should using him “for personal political gain” matter?
Just for the record Larry Flint and those that made the remark that Trig Palin IS Down Syndrome:
Down Syndrome is a CONDITION, not a PERSON. You can’t “be” DS, you can HAVE DS.
Trig Palin is a precious little boy – no matter how anyone feels about his mother or her political career.
Thank you Pamela!
Lita,
He wasn’t attacking Trig…
Flynt said, “It’s brain dead. A virtual vegetable. … How long is it going to live? Another 12, 15 years? Doesn’t even know it’s in this world.”
Are you saying that if I called you brain dead, and a virtual vegetable, and said that you don’t even know that you’re in the world, you would not consider that a personal attack?
I am an atheist progressive, and I found Larry FLynt’s statements to be vile, They do not reflect my (or any of my liberal friends’) viewpoints on children with Down’s Syndrome. I am prolife after the age of viability, however, so I am not quite as liberal as some. I still think this was a hideous evil thing for this man to say about a child who was brought to term, loved, and wanted. How horribly bigoted against disabled people! And he is a racist as well, looking at his remarks about the Obamas. We all need to stop fighting and thoroughly condemn people, whichever side of the argument they stand, who talk like this.
Why after viability, Alaina? Are the lives taken in abortions less human before that point? If so, why, in your understanding?
Lita Haversham says:
May 28, 2011 at 5:55 pm
I think everyone is missing the point. He wasn’t attacking Trig, he was making commentary on Sarah Palin’s use of Trig for personal political gain. She exploits that baby every chance she gets. And I think he’s right on that point.
Is Palin exploiting her husband too? Was Barak exploiting Michelle and his girls? At what age do you consider bringing one’s child in public appropriate? Is the fact that has Downs Syndrome the real issue here? Are you anti-life or pro-life?
* * * * *
Flint needs our prayers. What a legacy he has created for himself. :-(
“It’s brain dead. A virtual vegetable.”
America’s celebrated purveyor of sleaze must have practiced that one in front of a mirror.
@xalisae, as I said, I do not wish to argue on the ethics of abortion on this thread, I wish for us all to thoroughly condemn Flynt’s attitude toward a child. Hate on Palin all you want, it is thoroughly horrid.
However, my personal opinion is that a fetus that is not viable is thoroughly dependent on it’s mother and will die if separated from her, has not gained “personhood” as such, and a woman has a right to not have her body for such use. However, after the time for this has passed, and a fetus has a chance of living outside the womb, it has obtained autonomous personhood, therefore having rights to live. I do not support abortion after 14 weeks, actually, I think that is plenty of time to make your choice, and the fetal nervous system is too developed after that. Just my opinion, do not want to debate, I just want to condemn jerks like Flynt who condemn disabled children.
Oh and by the way, whoever was arguing that Palin is using Trig is making a nonsensical argument. Is Obama “using” Malia and Sasha when they make appearances? Or is he simply proud of his beautiful family? Same goes for Palin.
Don’t worry. Larry Flint is not the only person to make such an offensive, vicious statement about Trig Palin, and claiming that Sarah Palin should have had Trig aborted.
Way back when Sarah was first running as VP in 2008, and she kicked Obama’s behind right out of the gate from the first speech she gave, putting that awful candidate, John McCain ahead in the polls and in the primaries up till virtually the last week prior to the election, there were others who made a similar statement, mocking Sarah Palin for the most idiotic things they could fabricate, and also mocking Sarah for not aborting Trig, while disrespecting Trig, and so on.
Remember, many on the left believed that Sarah Palin’s daughter actually was pregnant and that Trig was her daughter’s baby, but Sarah was hiding the fact and pretending to be Trig’s mother. Of course that went south when her daughter DID have a baby of her own not long after Momma Grizzly, Sarah Palin gave birth to Trig. Andrew Sullivan, and others, spread that nasty, false rumor.
At least one of those making a similar, cruel statement is a woman “journalist/blogger” of the left.
If I have time I’ll give some more information later.
Don’t be surprised. The left is just a vile, cruel, vicious, hate filled, bigoted, racist, misogynist group of people who hate children, hate women, hate men, hate so much that it makes their head spin. They cannot help it.
Hmm, I belong to the left, I suppose, and I am none of those things, Generalizing people like that is unproductive and hateful.
If anyone is interested in adopting a child with Down Syndrome, or who is HIV positive, or who has other special needs, you should check out Reece’s Rainbow: http://reecesrainbow.org
I am hoping to adopt a little boy (who does not have Down Syndrome) featured on their website :)
Children with disabilities are people, just like disabled elderly men. Ugliness is only found in the heart.
Oh sure Larry Flynt.. Sarah Palin has done such a disservice to women? Not you right? You and all your women with zero self-esteem who take off all their clothes and allow themselves to be portrayed as having sex with animals (which I read goes on in Hustler) and the like? I’ve been told Hustler makes Playboy look pure in comparison. Shame on Sarah Palin! Thank goodness for men like Larry Flynt looking out for women!
Ironic also that an ugly old man drooling in a wheel chair would claim an active, happy, adorable little boy is brain dead and shouldn’t be in the world. If I wasn’t pro-life I could very easily look at Larry Flynt the same way.
Alaina says: May 28, 2011 at 11:35 pm
“Hmm, I belong to the left, I suppose, and I am none of those things, Generalizing people like that is unproductive and hateful.”
====================================================================
Hitler was a vegetarian. Thank GOD the Führer did not eat meat. Just think what kind of a violent beast he would have been.
Pro-life leftist/progressive/humanists are statistically insignificant. You could hold your annual convention in a Waffle House.
Save your lectures for your ‘dead babies r us’ colleagues. They are statistically significant.
I am sure you have already attempted to ‘reason’ with them.
How’s that working for you?
But you keep on trying. The exercise will be good for you.
Sooner or later you will come to the inescapable conclusion that: “We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.’”
Benjamin Franklin
and it may well be “that their sole purpose in life is simply to serve as a warning to others.’”
Part of what makes Larry Flynt’s comments so bizarre is that he himself is disabled.
Taylor says: May 28, 2011 at 12:57 pm
“This is the opinion of a single, deranged, bigoted man…one that does not reflect the feelings or thoughts of Liberals, nor the Pro-Choice movement.”
===================================================================
Really?
Who appointed you sherrif and spokesweasel for ‘liberals’ and/or the ‘dead babies r us’ mob.
If you had qualified you statement with ‘I do not believe’ or ‘in my opinion’ or given some kind of objective statistical data to corroborate your assertion, then I might have cut you some slack.
But there have been too many of your liberal colleagues who have posted on this site that share skynFlynts amoral idiotology to let your claim stand unchallenged.
skynFlynt, Bill ‘Slick Willy’ Clinton, and Barny Franks are strange bedfellows; congenital triplets from different mothers, joined at the soul; fellow travelers on the broad highway that leads to hell.
“I really hope that the woman involved with your brother right now (if he is in a relationship) knows full well his addiction and is running, not walking away”
Carder, why are you encouraging a wife to leave her husband?
yor bro ken, you are a very cruel human being. Comparing vegetarians to Hitler? Seriously? What does a vegan lifestyle have to do with abortion? And what does Hitler have to do with vegans? Hitler was also a catholic, which means NOTHING about catholics. Hitler was an evil man, period. Generalizing everyone who has different opinions on issues than you is not only stupid, it is bigoted and puts a lie to the compassion that you claim for yourself, being pro-life. Godwin’s Law anyway, so you lose automatically.
Anyone who supports Flynt’s comments about Trig Palin is very wrong, conservative or liberal.
P.S., some of my friends support abortion, some dislike it but do not want the government legislating it, and still others believe it is wrong. The left isn’t this big mass of groupthink you believe it is. Neither is the right. People are people, some good and some bad, some right and some wrong. Idiocy is not confined to a single ideology or political party.
Hitler’s Nazism was fully contrary to the Church. When this was recognized and condemned by the bishops in Germany, Hitler’s response to the bishops was to send all the Jewish Catholics he could find to the death camps. This move of Hitler claimed the lives of hundreds, including St. Teresa Benedicta of the Cross, a.k.a., Edith Stein.
Liberals, Pornographers, MainStreamMedia, Chrissy Mathews and other Democrats seem to really hate Sarah Palin. She gets my vote in 2012.
Maybe I should elaborate what I mean by liberal/progressive. I am conservative in a few beliefs. I am for the most part pro-life. I do not believe in abortion past 14 weeks, except in cases where the health of the mother is in endangered. I am also anti-death penalty, except in cases where the perpetrator can be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to have committed the crime, and it is especially heinous with a high probability of recidivism. I am anti-euthanasia, unless someone has specifically stated in a living will that they not be kept alive through life support or feeding tubes (everyone should have a living will stating their wishes, to prevent the heartache and confusion that follows and accident or illness leaving them incapacitated).
About there my views part from conservative. I am pro gay marriage, pro consensual sex between consenting adults, pro protecting the environment, and do not want prayer in public schools forced on children (I have no problem with people voluntarily praying or holding study groups on school grounds, just as a LGBT group can). Can’t you see that few people fit handily into the labels you create for them? I have no hate in my heart for decent people who disagree with me, but I do have disgust for cruel and bigoted people who seek to hurt others. I do not put all religious or conservative people in a group to be ridiculed and judged. You should not do that to liberals. It isn’t kind or productive.
@Jasper, Hitler’s Nazism is contrary to any decent person’s teachings, including the catholic church, atheists, and vegetarians. He was an evil man, and I expect everyone who is a decent human to condemn him for his actions and words.
Larry Flynt’s comments are striking in the amount of ignorance they display about people with Down Syndrome. I have seen and talked to several who were far from “brain dead” or “vegetables.” The quality of a human being’s life is not determined by his or her I.Q. score. A person with Down Syndrome can be quite aware of life and have a life that is both happy and productive.
Alaina – you seem like my kind of girl. :)
Alaina–what is special about 14 weeks?
Alaina says: May 29, 2011 at 1:41 am
“yor bro ken, you are a very cruel human being. Comparing vegetarians to Hitler? Seriously? What does a vegan lifestyle have to do with abortion? And what does Hitler have to do with vegans? Hitler was also a catholic, which means NOTHING about catholics. Hitler was an evil man, period. Generalizing everyone who has different opinions on issues than you is not only stupid, it is bigoted and puts a lie to the compassion that you claim for yourself, being pro-life.
Godwin’s Law anyway, so you lose automatically.”
I did not disparage ‘vegetarians’.
Just illustrating the point that even if you are legitmately a member of an identifialbe group, it does not follow that you share any or all of the characteristics that identify the group.
At some point though the actions of the group, not just a few of the constituents, can become some so ’unreasonable’ that for the sake of your own conscience and your integrity, you have to publicly dissassociate yourself from the ‘pack’.
Your own description of the liberal ‘pack’ reveals that you are an insignificant minority and as such it is much more likely you will change to be more like them. Your ’14 week’
standard is not an indication of how different you are from the pack, but how similar you are.
If anything my comment might have offended some carnivores. [I like my steaks medium.]
His pulblic claims to the contrary, Adolph Hitler was as much a ‘catholic’ as I am a woman.
The Fuherr’s actions betrayed the emptiness of his words.
“Godwin’s Law anyway, so you lose automatically.”
Godwins Law:”As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches (100%).”[The rule does not make any statement about whether any particular reference or comparison to Adolf Hitler or the Nazis might be appropriate, but only asserts that the likelihood of such a reference or comparison arising increases as the discussion progresses.
I find it curious that a ‘liberal’ would allow the declarations of one man to censor speech on the entire internet.
But as the article from Wikipedia cleary shows Godwin only posited a thesis about the likelihood of something occurring.
He did not prohibit or universally disqualify the comparisons.
Liberals don’t like it, becasue in the case of pre-natal homicide it hits too close to home, as in ‘bullseye’, and misapplying Godwin’s law is a convenient way to avoid having their bliss jeopardized.
Or as the old proverb declares, ‘The hit dog always howls first’. But if the pack is liberal they howl early, they howl often, when in doubt they howl.
Generalizations are not always wrong and they are not always inaccurate.
Denise,
Jimmy Carter’s sister, Ruth Carter Stapleton, was an evangelist who briefly converted Flynt to Christianity in the 1970’s. Saint Peter writes in his letter that those who go back to their former ways after conversion are like dogs returning to lick their own vomit; and so it is with Flynt.
The paralytic (from assassination attempt) confined to a wheelchair, who slurs his words (from stroke caused by painkillers) is the visage of a tortured and mangled human being, whose outside reflects the rage-fueled inside. His rage against Trig Palin is his rage against his own hardscrabble life. Flynt never had it easy, but he has chosen to destroy everything in his path as a consequence.
Just spent the morning and early afternoon visiting the local railway museum with my five year old son who, among many other unique qualities, has DS… I can’t help thinking he was a good deal happier and more fun to be with than Larry Flynt would have been!
There is a student at the university I attend who has Down Syndrome. I have a sneaking suspicion that she knows she’s in the world.
Spoken from the lips of a man whose entire existence requires others to do things for him. He cannot walk, get out of bed, get dress, urinate, defecate, nor prepare food for himself. Yet he’s calling Trig a vegetable. Interesting.
Having a choice to spend a day with either Trig or Larry: I choose Trig.
Larry’s vehement denial that Trig is a human being has reminded me much of my Aunt Diane. She was mentally retarded. Her life was amongst her friends. She lived in a group home and spent 20+ years working at a local handi-shop. She never missed a day of work, and that dedication gave her a special reward and an article in the local paper.
After she passed away, I spoke with some of her friends. Yes, Larry-a mentally-retarded woman had friends. She also lived into her 50’s, only succumbing to cancer. Her friends spoke admirably about her. After seeing how her friends grieved her loss, how could you NOT say they were human?She made her lunch every day. We all agreed from that day on, that every time we make a PB & J, we’d remember Diane. And I still do.
Larry should recognize brain dead, he has that condition…..plus a heart of stone!
His future in hell isn’t going to be pleasurable and his gold wheelchair may be permanent!
Will I pray for his conversion, yes, my Father in heaven has confirmed that!
To die to self is to live…………
The howls of the liberal ‘wolf pack’ might just as likley be screams of glee.
Either way, they are not the evidence of a convicted and contrite spirit.
Alaina said:
“pro consensual sex between consenting adults, pro protecting the environment”
Alaina, you are blind to your own closed-minded self when you try and represent yourself as reasonable and imply you think ‘conservatives’ are against consentual sex between consenting adults. Maybe you could show you are capable of growing as a person and begin by taking that back. Once you do that, it would show you are capable of reason and we could go from there.
@yor bro ken
“Just illustrating the point that even if you are legitmately a member of an identifialbe group, it does not follow that you share any or all of the characteristics that identify the group.
At some point though the actions of the group, not just a few of the constituents, can become some so ’unreasonable’ that for the sake of your own conscience and your integrity, you have to publicly dissassociate yourself from the ‘pack’.”
Well, I see your point now, it did not seem very clear before. This is true, a good point. Which is why I am not a Democrat. Non-affiliated, because I despise the Republicans as well. I tend to identify as a liberal because my beliefs fall too left for me to be comfortable with identifying with the right. I can’t ignore stuff I feel strongly about (no death penalty) in favor of other issues (no “abortion on demand.”‘). The right certainly doesn’t want me! ;) I stand by my statement that you cannot know much about an individual by knowing their political leaning. Most democrats I know are nice people, however misguided.
“ Your own description of the liberal ‘pack’ reveals that you are an insignificant minority and as such it is much more likely you will change to be more like them. Your ’14 week’
standard is not an indication of how different you are from the pack, but how similar you are.”
*sigh* I hate explaining this, I actually hate discussing abortion because both sides are so unreasonable. But I will try to explain.
Before the age of viability, I don’t believe that a fetus can be conferred the full rights of personhood. 14 weeks is fairly arbitrary, I will admit, but it prevents irresponsible people from dragging decisions out and causing unnecessary pain and suffering to a fetus. I dislike abortion as birth control, and think that should be avoided, even prohibited. However, sadly, this is not feasible. In a perfect world, every child would be wanted and every woman would welcome her pregnancy, but we are not there yet. The only responsible law I see is one absolutely prohibiting late term abortion (except for mother’s health exclusions), and limiting early abortions with counseling and options, with abortion being the last result of process of education, if the woman or girl will not change her mind. That is the best we can do for now, hopefully with education the unplanned pregnancy rate will go down. I don’t like abortion, but I would rather fight it in the real world rather than ignore the fact that about fifty percent of the populace does not agree that abortion is wrong. Figuring out a way to reduce abortions is the goal, and simply blanket-banning the process is not going to solve the issues behind why it is so prevalent. It will simply push abortion providers underground.
“I find it curious that a ‘liberal’ would allow the declarations of one man to censor speech on the entire internet.
But as the article from Wikipedia cleary shows Godwin only posited a thesis about the likelihood of something occurring.
He did not prohibit or universally disqualify the comparisons.
Liberals don’t like it, becasue in the case of pre-natal homicide it hits too close to home, as in ‘bullseye’, and misapplying Godwin’s law is a convenient
way to avoid having their bliss jeopardized.”
*rolls eyes* Yes, I’m totally for censorship because I made a joke. Lighten up. I know exactly what Godwin proposed, I was poking fun at the internet meme where people claim victory when the other side of the argument has mentioned Hitler. Have you heard of jokes?
I will say this. Comparing people to Nazis is stupid, does not further the conversation or make any good points, and shows a lack of thought. If seriously the best you can do is say “LIBERALZ IS LIKE HITLER OMG!” then maybe you don’t have a good argument.
The purity of the DS individuals makes Larry’s demons shriek with rage. They are untouchable by malevolence, the human face of God’s goodness among us. For that, they must, MUST be prevented from living among us, lest they convict the likes of Flynt without ever uttering a cross word.
Poor Larry. It isn’t his wheelchair that imprisons him. It’s his inability to reconcile with his past, and his addiction to the money he makes through the dehumanization of the male and female actors and models in his movies and magazines.
If seriously the best you can do is say “LIBERALZ IS LIKE HITLER OMG!” then maybe you don’t have a good argument.
I think “LIBERALZ IS LIKE HITLER OMG!” is a great argument but maybe “LIBERALZ SUPPORT KILLING HUMANS OMG!” is a bit better and easier for da liberalz to understand.
@truthseeker, I said that because I believe that conservatives are often against pornography, gay marriage, and comprehensive sex education. This seems counter-productive and restrictive to me. I personally don’t see anything wrong with porn, provided the actors are above age and consenting. Homosexuality is another one that I disagree with most conservative on, I think it is perfectly natural. I realize some conservatives agree with me, but they are the minority. I realize I was conflating conservatism with the religious right, who DO have a problem with unmarried adults having sex. Not all conservatives are right wing Christians, but a good portion are. Likewise, not all liberals are abortion supporters, but the majority are.
Alaina, from what I’ve experienced, the Right is far more tolerant of diverse opinions than the left.
I’m conservative in most areas, but not all. My husband jokes that I’m a Republican hippie, and that’s probably a pretty accurate representation.
You might be happy to know that while around 50% of the population say they’re “pro-choice” the vast majority of people really believe that abortion should occur only for the “hard cases.” While there definitely needs to be education, I think that eventual overturn of “abortion on demand” will happen.
@Lauren
Hmm, I don’t know about either side being more tolerant. I have dealt with both conservatives and liberals in many ways and they BOTH act pretty darn intolerant. Conservatives don’t like me because of the gay marriage stuff (except libertarians, they don’t seem to care), while liberals seem to be upset that I don’t support abortion 100%. I was asked to leave a church by hypocritical (divorced!!) pastors because I disagreed with their treatment of teen moms and female divorcees ( this was back when I was religious). I have also been called names by hippy anti-war bigots for stating that war is sometimes necessary. Both sides are ridiculously intolerant about my atheism, the right a little more so. I don’t think bigotry is confined by ideology, haters gonna hate wherever they fall on the social issue and political spectrum.
I am happy to hear that more people disagree with “abortion on demand.” Education, love and support is the best way to support those who do not go through with an abortion, or those who do and need emotional healing, and support this trend toward less abortions. How can frightened young women see that there are other options if they are tormented by people dehumanizing them and calling them names? I think abortion clinic protests damage their own movement and turn people away from the valid arguments they may have. Likewise, I believe that people who want abortions lessened but are not ardently pro-life damage their credibility by insisting that abortion always stay legal until late in pregnancy. Everyone needs to understand what we agree on (reducing abortions) and what realistic things we can do to promote this (comprehensive education, counseling, support for mothers, support for children, etc, etc). There are solutions, we just need not to be so partisan and blind to not see them.
I said that because I believe that conservatives are often against pornography
Alaina, if meant to say that you are pro-pornography then just come out and say it. Do you really think most people would interpret saying “pro consensual sex between consenting adults” as meaning pro-pornography?
And you couldn’t help but throw another whopper in there with your response:
conservatives are against “comprehensive sex education”
You are correct there BUT only if you clarify what you mean by “sex education”. It is the pro-aborts and liberals who would rather girls did not receive comprehensive education about their natural body rhythym or the accurate depiction of the gestational developement of human beings. What conservatives are against liberals who think it is their job to teach our children about how often or when or in what positions or with whom they believe “sex” is appropriate. Even to the point of going into their schools and pushing children to take high does hormones and dispensing it to them over extended periods of time and without parental knowledge.
Alaina, how far does your “support” of homosexual sex go? Would you feel inclined to support an agenda where public schools teach other peoples children (unemancipated minors) that homosexual sex is ok? Conservatives are opposed to liberals and anybody else (Planned Parenthood included) who feels they have the right to usurp their parental authority. What gives you or anybody else the impression that they have a right to encourage sexual activity among unemancipated minors? This goes beyond the moral question of promiscuos sex or homosexual sex and attacks the fundamental order society has placed on the family.
@truthseeker,
I agree that a comprehensive sex education should include this:
1) An honest and factual discussion of both gender’s biological development.
2) An honest and factual discussion of fetal development.
3) An honest and factual discussion of ALL birth control practices, including family planning, abstinence, condoms, the Pill, etc. This includes failure rates and proper usage.
4) An honest and factual discussion of STDs. This includes ways of transmission, effects on the body, and treatment (or lack thereof).
5) An honest and factual discussion of the emotional and possible financial effects of casual sex. This includes biological facts about female attachment to men they have sex with (due to release of hormones), the increased risk of cervical cancer for girls who have sex under age 18, and the hardship of teen pregnancy, plus other issues. This should not be used as a scare tactic, rather an honest discussion that sex has many consequences (some good some bad) and they all need to be taken into account.
In no way should sex education contain positions, or judgments on who you should have sex with. Religion is the responsibility of parents to teach, not schools. Schools are responsible for informing students of the biological and real world facts, parents are responsible for the moral teaching of their children. And of course I support the right of parents to excuse their children from sex class if they wish to teach their children about sex themselves.
As to conservative vs liberal on sex education, I have seen the majority of conservatives I know support abstinence only education, something I vehemently oppose as short-sighted and ineffectual. I haven’t heard a liberal I know espouse the idea that comprehensive sex ed should include positions, orders on who to have sex with, etc. Most liberals I know support what I outlined above. Maybe I have just met strange conservatives and liberals, but that’s what I have heard in my discussions.
As to pornography, I oppose censorship, and I think pornography of adults should not be censored. I DO interpret issues of consent in terms of whether you support the right of consenting adults to do what they want in the privacy of their own homes with other consenters, whether it be porn, homosexuality, more than one partner, etc. I guess I am pro-porn in that respect. I don’t enjoy it myself, I am just not going to tell everyone else they can’t have it because it isn’t my cup of tea.
And you didn’t address opposition to homosexuality or premarital sex.
@truthseeker.
I support schools teaching that it is not ok to bully those who are homosexual or transgender. They should not pass judgment on the rightness or wrongness, that is for the parents to teach. They should make schools safe for all students, and not allow bullying or bigotry towards students regardless of their sexuality.
Alaina says: May 29, 2011 at 2:29 pm
1. Everyone needs to understand what we agree on (reducing abortions) and what realistic things we can do to promote this (comprehensive education, counseling, support for mothers, support for children, etc, etc).
2. There are solutions, we just need not to be so partisan and blind to not see them.
===================================================================
Alaina,
1. My goal is not the reducing the number of elective abortions, but eliminating them entirely.
You are free to work to reduce number of elective abortions. I encourage you to do so. If that saves even one pre-natal child’s life then you will have done well.
But I am not willing to concede one inch to the ‘dead babies r us’ mob on the humanity of the pre-natal child. That would be a betraying those children. There is no ‘detente’. It is an illusory concept.
The ‘dead babies r us’ crown are not interested in stopping at the 14th week or the 40th week or the 70th year.
They have embraced a culture of death and if I take you at your word, you are an exception in their midst, as soon as you have ceased to be useful, you will be expendable. I am not saying they will kill you, now, but they will push you to the side and at best humor you if you don’t make too much fuss.
2. As soon as you throw down the term ‘comprehensive education’, you reveal the contents of your heart. There is no education in getting kicked twice by the same donkey. These ‘solutions’ have been tried, tested, and failed. They are counter productive by design/default. They are both subversive and corrosive.
Abortion has become the golden cash cow for the left. It is a constant source of revenue. It has become a seemingly self sustainable industry which peddles in human flesh. Money is the mother’s milk of politics. PP is just the biggest whore in the bunch. It is not about reproductive rights, or equal opportunity, it is about the money.
Like the Jeffersons was a spin off of All in the Family, ACCORN is spin off of PP. If the mother was good, the daughter will be better.The left could not survive politically without the moneylaundering that occurrs thru these institutions.
When GOD fearing folk deserted, abandoned, fled from the democrat party it was left with the alternative. The drift of the left into perversion was predictable and it has been constant and it is accerlerating.
Larry Flynt is the poster boy of the left. He represents the ‘prototype of a normal person’ for humanists. He is the Marxian ‘new man’. Only the most ardent feministas of the left will publicly criticize him because they cannot easily refute his philosophy without refuting their own. Flynt has taken their bankrupt idiotoloy, used it against them and extrapolated it along it’s predictable trajectory.
Hell knows what’s it’s end is, but I can make an educated guess.
@yor bro ken,
You seem to be very paranoid. All corporations are obsessed with money, it is the nature of the beast. I am not sure what you mean by “casting me aside” and that I am “expendable,” seeing as I don’t belong to a particular ideology or group. I guess someone could kill me for my fairly non-radical views, not sure what I am supposed to do about that.
I am an atheist, don’t believe that “God-fearing” is a necessity for morality. We do agree, however, that the best solution is reducing the number of elective abortions to as close to zero as possible (seeing as people are people and will do bad things regardless of how hard we try to get rid of it, close to zero is a worthy goal). We differ in the way we see to reduce it. I think tightening restrictions, eliminating late-term abortions all together and requiring counseling, will help. I also think assisting in providing factual comprehensive sex education will help as well. Abstinence-only has been ineffective.
I am not sure what you mean by saying I “reveal the contents of my heart” when I support comprehensive education. What do you believe I support? I outlined it above.
Larry Flynt is a poster boy for idiocy and bigotry to the disabled. Nothing more.
So where do you fall on support for the family unit as the structural building block of our society? Do you see it as detrimental to society when somebody with an agenda like Planned Parenthood outwardly usurps parental authority and encorages unemancipated minors to break with that authority?
I think the statement “structural building block” is up for debate. I am not sure what you are referring to here? Parental consent laws? I believe parents have the right to know what their minor children are receiving for health care, and should be informed, except in cases of abuse or incest. I definitely support parents and their children. If you are trying to get me to say that homosexuality damages the family unit I definitely don’t believe that. What exactly are you referring to?
Alaina said: And you didn’t address opposition to homosexuality or premarital sex.
Alaina, I didn’t address them because I believe you categorized them correctly as conservative characteristics. Was there anything more specific that you would like me to address about them?
No, I just wanted to make sure we were in agreement that they are conservative characteristics, ones that I do not share. :D
What I am saying is that Planned Parenthood is a predatory organization that usurps parental authority by dispensing drugs to unemancipated minors and telling them they have a right to do so behind their parents backs. This goes against a core conservative value (the importance of the family unit as a structural building block for society) that goes beyond any single issue like homosexuality. We could differ about wether or not we see negative effects of homosexual behaviour but agree that engaging in homosexual sex should not be a part of “sex-education” to children. Note that in your own five points of comprehensive sex-education listed above; homosexual sex was not mentioned as a part of comprehensive sex education.
I agree that a comprehensive sex education should include this:
1) An honest and factual discussion of both gender’s biological development.
2) An honest and factual discussion of fetal development.
3) An honest and factual discussion of ALL birth control practices, including family planning, abstinence, condoms, the Pill, etc. This includes failure rates and proper usage.
4) An honest and factual discussion of STDs. This includes ways of transmission, effects on the body, and treatment (or lack thereof).
5) An honest and factual discussion of the emotional and possible financial effects of casual sex. This includes biological facts about female attachment to men they have sex with (due to release of hormones), the increased risk of cervical cancer for girls who have sex under age 18, and the hardship of teen pregnancy, plus other issues. This should not be used as a scare tactic, rather an honest discussion that sex has many consequences (some good some bad) and they all need to be taken into account.
In no way should sex education contain positions, or judgments on who you should have sex with. Religion is the responsibility of parents to teach, not schools. Schools are responsible for informing students of the biological and real world facts, parents are responsible for the moral teaching of their children. And of course I support the right of parents to excuse their children from sex class if they wish to teach their children about sex themselves.
I agree with all of that, emphasis on the last bit, because I want to teach my children about that myself. I support the other points you outlined because I understand that not all parents CARE enough to teach their own children. Granted, I think age-appropriateness is important, and kids should only be given the information that they need, so I think a questionnaire should be given to determine which kids need this information and which don’t and when…rather than standardized at-grade-level mandated courses…but I think that up to this point, your views about conservative vs. liberal have been kind of skewed due to cliques and other influences.
I consider myself a conservative libertarian. I also think that government-recognized marriage should be dissolved and replaced with civil unions which everyone can get, which can then be taken to the religious institution of your choice (or none at all, if you are so inclined) to be recognized in ceremony. I also think any religious institution should retain the right to refuse to recognize any civil union if they choose. That way I think equal rights may be maintained by everyone, including those who will not recognize homosexual marriage on religious grounds, and homosexuals will have the benefits of marriage open to them as well. Is that good enough for you?
However, I cannot ignore (which is what you seem to be wont to do in this case) the REASON we feel abortion is wrong. That is to say, regardless of the age of the human being, or their location, abortion is killing them at the behest of their parents, and that should not be tolerated in a civil society. We should take measures to reduce what some women feel is their “need” for abortion, to be sure. but there is no excuse for the legality of such a barbaric practice.
@Truthseeker,
Well, I certainly agree that no one should usurp the rights of the parents in regards to healthcare for their children. If Planned Parenthood is doing that they should be charged with custodial interference or something of that nature. If the laws are not currently in place they should be.
@xalisae,
Well, we agree on far more than we disagree on. I also think civil unions for all are the answer to the arguments about gay marriage. I also believe in freedom of religion, so I will support the church’s right to ignore such unions. Marriage is not a state’s responsibility, and civil unions are not the church’s business. We mostly agree on sex ed, with of course parental wishes exceeding the school’s ability to teach it.
I know we may not agree on early term abortion, but it does not mean that people who believe like you and people who believe like me cannot at least work together to try to reduce elective abortion. If it is illegal, it will be harder to work on this, IMO. If girls aren’t coming forward, how will we know who to help? The whole purpose of this discussion, on my part, is to get everyone to see that even people who disagree do not have to be polarized in trying to do what’s best for society, especially in hot button issues like abortions.
My own beliefs about the dangers homosexuality poses to the spirit or to God’s plan for the family aside; I would not be opposed to homosexual sex being listed as a physically dangerous health practice in the STD section.
Well, I certainly agree that no one should usurp the rights of the parents in regards to healthcare for their children. If Planned Parenthood is doing that they should be charged with custodial interference or something of that nature. If the laws are not currently in place they should be.
Pro-choice organizations have opposed parental notification laws in every state proposed.
Alaina,
Why are you against legalizing the killing of a baby at fifteen weeks gestation?
@truthseeker,
“My own beliefs about the dangers homosexuality poses to the spirit or to God’s plan for the family aside; I would not be opposed to homosexual sex being listed as a physically dangerous health practice in the STD section.”
I do not support the schools telling children what sexual behaviors to engage in. They can give facts such as anal sex is riskier in terms of STDs compared to vaginal sex, but they also should learn that lesbians have lower rates of STDs across the board. My children will learn in my home that I believe homosexuality is natural, while in your home your children will learn that you believe it is a sin. We both have the right to have our moral teachings not undermined by the schools.
@xalisae
If they do, then they are wrong. Simple as that. I do not ally myself to either the pro-choice or the pro-life movement.
@truthseeker,
I have explained before. Before viability, a fetus is a part of its mother in terms of sustenance and life. Therefore, a woman has some rights to what happens to it. I hate that I can’t just categorically state that I want all abortion illegal, but it is more complex than that. I may feel morally repulsed by the thought of having an abortion, but I believe that legislating against early abortion is counter-productive anyway. Pushing it underground makes it harder to find the women who need help and encouragement to make another choice. I do believe in the complete banning of later abortions, and the limiting of early term abortions with counseling and education. People should be fully informed on the development of the fetus, and the possible complications and effects of the abortion procedure, as well as full information on other options.
Alaina said:
As to pornography, I oppose censorship, and I think pornography of adults should not be censored.
Alaina, you do however realize that the pornography industry leads to human sex trafficing and to the exploitation of women (the great majority of pornography out there is desperate or young women being exploited). And you are willing to pay that price so that people like Flynt can sell ”watching other people having sex”?
@truthseeker,
What, in the name of the Zeus, makes you think that I am for human trafficking or the exploitation of anyone? I am aware that the porn industry has its problems. However, a good amount of the porn industry is on the up and up. The research done has not shown a link to legitimate US porn companies to human trafficking, at least not in the US. Any companies that coerces someone into performing in a pornographic movie or traffics in humans should be brought up on charges of sexual assault and slavery, and should be put out of business. Regulating the sex industry is different from destroying it in the name of morality. Maybe I didn’t make that clear. As to desperate people involved in it, desperate people do all kinds of activities that are harmful, from selling drugs to prostitution. I am not sure how making porn illegal will change that at all. It will be out of the reaches of regulation when it goes underground, and if you want to see really sick stuff that’s the way to go. Helping these desperate people is the answer, not criminalizing porn. If the desperate people have resources other than these businesses, then only people who wish to be in the sex industry will be there. And I have met a few who want ot be in porn, believe me.
Before viability, a fetus is a part of its mother in terms of sustenance and life.
No. There is never a point in anyone’s life that they are merely a part of their mother. We are all separate human beings. Do we derive our nutrients from our mother? Yes, but so do breastfeeding infants. They are no less separate human beings from their mothers than bottle-fed infants, and neither are just a part of their mothers. They deserve to have their lives protected by law, as do humans in utero at all stages.
I am a prolife teenager who believes that every baby has the right to live, because it’s hypocritical for us who’ve been born to take life from those who haven’t. Mr. Flynt is a hateful little hypocrite of a man. I have friends with down syndrome who are some of the sweetest people in the world. We all start off as the same thing. Both sides of the pro-life vs pro-choice argument need to be completely honest before any fair decision can be made.
And on the topic of sex education, kids my age (15) and younger are already having sex. Giving them birth control isn’t promoting it and making it right, but it is protecting them. They’ve already made their choice, so the least that can be done is try to keep them as safe as possible. I encourage abstinence, but I do realize that absinence only education is not the way to go, because kids have made these descisions already. If you want kids like the ones I go to school with every day to be safe, just tell them what they’re getting into, without bringing political crap into the discussion.
Alainia: I have explained before. Before viability, a fetus is a part of its mother in terms of sustenance and life. Therefore, a woman has some rights to what happens to it.
This makes no sense. You can’t just say “in terms of” and then list irrelevant information. Let me show you.
“When someone puts his hand on my shoulder then I become a part of his body in terms of his touching me.“
I mean, hell, you could say that the mother becomes a part of the preborn’s body because of the same connection. There is a clear definition of “part of your body.” You can’t just make things up.
Here is another, simple example. (Also a favorite among pro-choicers.) Imagine that I kidnapped you and hooked your kidneys up to another person. Is that person now a part of your body? Think before you post.
Alaina,
Viability is a pernicious word. Is a two-year old viable if left alone in a fully-stocked grocery store for a week? Should there be a lesser punishment for murdering a scuba diver, a coma patient, or a sleeping person for that matter?
Viable. Able to live unless killed.
An $85,000 wheel chair? Maybe he’d give you a ride in it joan.
“Among the rich you will never find a really generous man even by accident. They may give their money away, but they will never give themselves away; they are egotistic, secretive, dry as old bones. To be smart enough to get all the money, you must be dull enough to want it.” CK Chesterton
X – 4:04
I like your paragraph re: civil unions and also on sex ed, age appropriateness, and about teaching it myself to my kids – which I already have begun with my oldest, on an age-appropriate level.
Great video called “Dreams,” about people with Down syndrome: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_-P4t2jR1g
Alaina, you sound very reasonable.
I also would probably support the abolition of the government deciding who may and may not marry. A civil union conveying benefits could be a useful thing for many pairs or groups of individuals. Roommates of the same gender might desire a tax break or visit each other in the hospital.
The reason many conservatives are against gay marriage is not that they necessarily want to control what a person’s sex life is like, or who can love each other. I, for one, believe that sex was intended solely for the marital union of a man and a woman. I do not believe that any other sort of sexual activity is right, good, or healthy. I wish everyone had these views, and I would try to convince someone that sex was meant for marriage if I had a chance–not because I want to control them, but because I have found great freedom and reward in my sex life as a faithful married woman. I would try to convince others that this was true because I think believing and living this way is to their benefit. Think of something you love–your favorite food, a classic movie you watch over and over, a band you can’t get enough of. If your friend had never tried your favorite food, you might suggest it–not because you need your friend to be like you, but because you find pleasure in the food and hope they can too. If an acquaintance mentioned movie night, you might advocate for your favorite movie to be shown. That wouldn’t mean you felt everyone should be forced to watch the movie; you just hope they will enjoy it. If the topic of music came up, you might mention your favorite band. It is because you think they’re the best–but if your friend didn’t care for them and never wanted to listen to them again, you might wish they’d change their mind and think they were missing out. It might be hard to understand why what you thought was great was noise to them.
This is why I as a conservative (and a Christian) tell people about morality and about Jesus. It does not come from a desire to control or oppress, but because I find great joy and peace in following Jesus and want others to know that too. Christianity is not about excluding people or making them feel bad for their sins. I don’t need anyone to tell me I should feel bad when I do wrong. But the gift of Christ is actually freedom from guilt. My treasure in Christ is the law which brings joy. In following God I no longer need guilt, because God is not a god of condemnation. In doing God’s will I discover joy, because of Who He Is–and that He loves me. I recognize people’s legal rights to do as they wish with their bodies. But I wish they would do better.
As for abortion–why do you believe that a 13-week-old fetus is not a human being worthy of protection? Or is it that you believe a fetus is human, but does not deserve rights? What do you feel maks a human beings people, and what rights does a human person have? Reducing abortion is unnecessary and pointless unless the unborn human matters; reducing them is not enough if the fetus deserves a right to life. We aim to reduce things that are wrong, and often at the same time we work to make them unthinkable and illegal. We don’t seek to make rape “safe, legal, and rare” even though it is a decision a man makes about how to use his body–because using his body to rape hurts and demeans another person. By the way, I think most of those who stand outside places where women to go to kill their babies are not trying to condemn or guilt her–they just seek one more chance to save that little person’s life. Because it’s not just a matter of personal taste, but a human life that is at stake. It is one last chance in a society that will not educate or love to tell these desperate woman that their baby has a beating heart and all his or her beautiful parts; that they are strong enough to parent on their own, or to parent a child with special needs; that there are organizations to help with necessities so that they don’t feel forced to end the baby’s life.
“Likewise, I believe that people who want abortions lessened but are not ardently pro-life damage their credibility by insisting that abortion always stay legal until late in pregnancy.”
In complete agreement here–thank you for being willing to admit this.
May the God you do not believe in shine the light of His love upon you, Alaina.
Anna said:
“Giving them birth control isn’t promoting it and making it right, but it is protecting them”.
Anna, thank you for posting. I have a fifteen year old daughter. I teach her about herself. I teach her not to use “the pil” because ingesting those high doses of steroids (artificial hormones) is harmful to a person? I teach her that a woman typically ovulates only once per menstrual cycle and that is usually in the middle of he cycle and the egg can only live for one day where it can be fertilized. So though, like you, I teach abstinence as the way to go; I would rather she did not take those pills just in case she ever looks for a one night stand. Over half the people who get aborions thought they were “protected”. So birth control is does not “protect” them and it only serves to give them the false feeling of protection and the false notion that they can have sex without getting pregnant and the birth control “protected” mentality sets young girls up for failure. I tell my daughter she is better off NOT taking those steroids. If she felt it was necessary to have a one-night stand she could plan it on the last day of her cycle and to also make sure he uses a condom to protect her from STDs. Again, I would not condone her having sex at her age but I also don;t want her hurting herself by buying into the birth control “protection” lie. Buying into the birth control “protection” lie will harm a lot more girls then it helps. Not just because of unintended pregnancy but also because of all the other negative side effects of taking steroids all the time. As a fifteen year old girl, does my logic make sense to you? What would it take for you to see that birth control doesn’t protect you? Are you aware that over fifty percent of abortions are commited on people who were “protected”? If so, then why do you still believe that birth control can “protect” you? Why would you or any other teenager want to use birth control instead of the method I suggested? Thanks again for posting Anna.
“The purity of the DS individuals makes Larry’s demons shriek with rage. They are untouchable by malevolence, the human face of God’s goodness among us. For that, they must, MUST be prevented from living among us, lest they convict the likes of Flynt without ever uttering a cross word.”
Dr. Nadal hits the nail on the head yet again. That sums it up perfectly.
Alright, I need to way in the same-sex marriage lie. There never was, is not now, and never will be such a thing as same-sex marriage. Marriage is between a man and woman. If the homosexuals need to have unions more power to them. But they should NOT be allowed to destroy marriage in order to feel good about their homosexual unions. The union of two men can never be “equal” to the union of a man and a woman. The lie is spreading every time anybody uses the phrase “same-sex marriage” as if it can even possibly exist.
Larry Flynt has a long history of dehumanizing and degrading members of the human race. Gloria Steinem once called him the “Josef Goebbels in the war against women” and rightly pointed out that he would never get away with degrading an ethnic or racial group in the way he degraded women. Why should we be surprised he would degrade a DS child? Certainly this..uh…person.. has demonstrated his degeneracy time and again.
Is gay marriage really that big of an issue to you guys? I mean, what is the difference between a society that condones homosexuality but disallows marriage, and a society that does the same but allows the marriage? Besides, all of the supposed harm is indirect anyways. Even if it is true that by allowing gay marriage, as a society, we cause some kind of harm to our children, that harm only comes as secondary. Abortion directly kills innocent humans unjustly. I don’t see how you can have room in your mind to worry about gay marriage when abortion should take up so much mental space.
@truthseeker,
I would take issue with your mischaracterization of the effectiveness and safety of birth-control, but you can teach your daughter whatever you want. I certainly don’t want to stop you.
However, did you know that 60% of women who use the pill have zero side-effects, and that the vast majority of of side effects reported are breakthrough bleeding (random bleeding not on your period) and loss of libido (ironically)? The very small amount of side effects that are harmful (such as stroke) happen to older women or smokers. The pill is 99% effective when used correctly, and about 95-97% effective in reality (people taking it improperly, doctor’s not giving clear instructions). The pill has been shown to reduce the incidence of ovarian, endometrial, and colorectal cancer.
Most people who get pregnant on birth control are using condoms, which have a higher failure rate and are more at risk of being used improperly. I would counsel sexually active teens to use both a condom (to protect against STDs) and a contraceptive such as the pill. This is part of the reason I am so passionate about education, so teens will get this information on how to use contraceptives properly.
One thing about a woman’s normal cycle. A woman (such as me) can be extremely irregular with ovulation and menstruation, making natural family planning all but useless. This is one of the reasons that natural family planning has a higher failure rate than hormonal contraceptives. If a woman is regular, then it can be very effective. Extremely non regular cycles make it is very risky. And of course it has no protection against STDs.
I don’t want to tell you how to inform your daughter or what to teach her. However, there are simply some facts. Accept them or reject them, at least you read them! ;P
@young christian woman
Thank you for your kind words. The reason I don’t like protesting at clinics is that I think it is ineffective. I think education and helping at-risk youth and women are the keys to helping stop elective abortions.
You seem like a very loving and kind person. I may never agree with you ideologically, but I do agree that your heart is in the right place.
However, did you know that 60% of women who use the pill have zero side-effects
How nice that you advocate for a drug that has negative effects for 40% of females it is prescribed to. Unbelievable.
@Oliver,
Sorry I had a response typed up to you but the board ate half my comment! I don’t have time at the moment to answer all you said again, but I will answer one thing.
“
I mean, hell, you could say that the mother becomes a part of the preborn’s body because of the same connection. There is a clear definition of “part of your body.” You can’t just make things up. Here is another, simple example. (Also a favorite among pro-choicers.) Imagine that I kidnapped you and hooked your kidneys up to another person. Is that person now a part of your body? Think before you post.”
I would argue that there is a clear difference between a fetus and a fully-developed viable human being, but we are not going to agree. I came on this board to find areas that pro-lifers and (semi)pro-choicers can agree on, not find the same points that people argue over and over and over.
We are not going to agree when the fetus gains rights and when it should be protected from abortion. However, we all agree that elective abortions should be reduced to as close to zero as possible. Why don’t we focus on what we can agree on and work towards? I will not ask you to concede one ounce of your convictions, and you need not ask the same of me. We can work together on reducing and eliminating abortion without bickering over the reasons someone disagrees with us.
@praxedes
That is comparable to most pharmaceuticals. And the vast majority of side effects are very minor. Serious side effects happen in about 1% of cases, which is comparable to most pharmaceuticals. There is nothing more dangerous about the pill than there is about ibuprofen, aspirin, antibiotic, albuterol, and a host of other drugs that people take every day without a thought. It is usually inadvisable to judge before you study.
It is usually inadvisable to judge before you study.
Then I kindly suggest you start studying.
For comparison, the side effects from inhaled albuterol (the most commonly prescribed asthma medication) run the gamut from coughing and headaches (in about 35% of patients) to allergic reactions and heart palpitations (in about 1% of cases).
Antibiotics trigger yeast infections in about 50% of women who have to use them for an infection, and can cause (rare) severe allergic reactions.
Ibuprofen and tylenol can cause nausea and dizziness (less severe, more common), all the way to kidney damage and renal failure (rare, much less common)
Aspirin causes blood-thinning, and is highly dangerous for people with clotting issues or who are on blood thinners. Also can cause allergic reactions (surprisingly common, about 5%, I am one of the sufferers of aspirin allergy, it is very unpleasant).
The point it, all pharmaceuticals have some minor risk of harm, oral contraceptives are no different in this respect.
The question is not why am I advocating birth control, it is why are you not?!? Effectively used birth control drastically reduces the incidence of unplanned pregnancy, and certainly we can all agree that birth control is a much better solution than abortion for sexually active people???
I take offense to that Praxedes. I have a Bachelor’s degree in chemistry and am working on my Master’s in chemical education. I have certainly studied pharmaceutical medications. I actually considered getting my Master’s in pharmacology before I decided I wanted to teach. Perhaps it is you who is misinformed?
And who the heck am I judging here? You are the one mocking me for providing factual information.
Alaina,
I look forward to debating the side-effects of contraception with you soon cause the negative side-efffects of birth control are numerous and some are life threatening. But there is something else you posted above that strikes me as even more critical to this discussion about contraceptives offering “protection” so I would like to address that first if you would oblige. You stated:
The pill is 99% effective when used correctly, and about 95-97% effective in reality (people taking it improperly, doctor’s not giving clear instructions).
What exactly does 99% effective mean? Somebody once told me that it means it is 99% effective in stopping pregnancy over a one year period. My question back to them, which they could not answer for me was this: Does the 99% effectiveness statistic depend upon how often you have sex? Did they even monitor how many times the people had sex over the course of the study and if they didn’t then how can the results be meaningful? The whole study would be a farce.
I believe the number of times you have sex is a very important number to know if you are trying to determine the effectiveness of birth control. I don’t know how you could have any kind of meaningful study if you did not track that information. I know that is very important to know when practicing NFP. The sex only on that last day of your cycle is a large part of the effectiveness. I look forward to your response.
Yes, there is a clear difference between a fetus and a fully-grown human being. It is age, not identity. Unless you’re talking about something other than a human fetus. But even that “fully-grown human being” will be different in seven years when every cell in his body has been replaced.
If you arbitrarily marginalize a fetus at whatever age, you open the can of worms that could lead to any but a taxpaying “fully-grown human being” being in similar danger.
By the way. My suggestion of only having sex on that last day of the cycle is “NFP on steroids” if you will. Most people who give statistic on NFP effectiveness are allowing for sex on the last 10 days of the cycle, which is much less effective then the method I recommended above where you only have sex on the last day of the cycle. I think the method I outlined, including the condom use, would be way over 99% effective at preventing conception and no hormones required. That is why I think it would be so fitting for the birth control pushers at Planned Parenthood to change the name of their organization to “Unplanned Sex and Abortuary Kingdom”
Oliver said:
“Is gay marriage really that big of an issue to you guys? I mean, what is the difference between a society that condones homosexuality but disallows marriage, and a society that does the same but allows the marriage?”
Oliver, Men and women are equal as persons but not the same. Marriage is the union of a man and a woman. To claim it is no different then the union of two men would be to live in a world where liberal mind-bending became the norm and truth and logic become irrelevant. The consequences would be enormous to individual families and to society. Accepting it does not have to mean condoning it out of political correctness.
@truthseeker,
No, oral contraception’s effectiveness is not dependent on how often you have sex, not at all.
Oral contraceptives work by preventing ovulation. With no ovulation, the sperm cannot reach the egg at all. It does not matter if you have sex once a month or ten times a day. Without ovulation, a fertilization cannot take place.
The reason the pill fails on very rare occasions can be due to several factors. Antibiotics can interfere with the hormones, causing an increased risk of ovulation. Many women are not aware of this, though they should be informed. Everybody’s body is different and will react slightly different to medications. Other medications can also cause the effectiveness of the pill to be reduced, though antibiotics are the most common. Also, even though the pill is effective for almost all women, some women might have slightly different reaction. All medications carry this risk of ineffectiveness. Antidepressants are the most striking example. However, the pill almost always works in almost all cases. When it fails, the most common problems are medication reactions and improper use.
I did mistype before. In perfect use studies, the effectiveness is around 99.7%, as compared to actual (reality) studies, which range from 92-98%. Sorry about the mistake. This table http://www.contraceptivetechnology.org/table.html gives the effectiveness of many different contraceptives. Notice how the pill’s perfect use is better than all other forms of birth control except for one form of IUD and male sterilization. I would not recommend the IUD to a teenager because of fertility and endometriosis concerns. Also notice the disparity between perfect use and actual use studies for the active forms of birth control. This is due to people missing a pill, not using a condom properly, etc.
As to your concerns about natural body cycles, you are right that the pill disrupts this. It causes an artificial 28-day cycle, with different hormone levels than in women on non hormonal birth control or no birth control at all. Let me tell you this is a great relief to those of use who have had very irregular cycles with a lot of problems, such as heavy bleeding and severe pain. This does not have a long term effect on your fertility, you resume your natural cycle within two-four months after discontinuing use.
NFP does not work the same way that oral contraceptives do. Oral contraceptives work by preventing ovulation, NFP works by avoiding sexual activity around fertile days. The amount of sex you have has no bearing on the pill’s effectiveness, because if you do not ovulate, you cannot get sperm to the egg.
“By the way. My suggestion of only having sex on that last day of the cycle is “NFP on steroids” if you will. Most people who give statistic on NFP effectiveness are allowing for sex on the last 10 days of the cycle, which is much less effective then the method I recommended above where you only have sex on the last day of the cycle. I think the method I outlined, including the condom use, would be way over 99% effective at preventing conception and no hormones required.”
Lol! I am in a healthy relationship with my fiance and I am not going to restrict our sex life to one day our of my cycle when I have a better option! We are not ready for children, and we are responsible enough to prevent that as much as possible. If teens are having sex, especially if they are in relationships, I sincerely doubt that they will restrict themselves to one day a month! Condoms AND the pill are going to protect them in all but rare instances. I have no doubt that your form of NFP would be highly effective, but it certainly won’t work for those of us who have a spontaneous sex life and enjoy having sex more often. As I said, it is your duty to raise and teach your daughter as you see fit, and your business how you and your wife practice birth control. I am simply giving factual information that you can use or ignore as you see fit. I can see the attraction of NFP to some couples, I hope you can see why others chose other methods.
Alaina said:
“No, oral contraception’s effectiveness is not dependent on how often you have sex, not at all.”
Alaina, You shouldn’t be spreading that kind of misinformation. It takes sperm to get pregnant and your chances of getting pregnant while on the pill does increase when you have more frequent sex due to the increased likelihood of fertilization during break-away ovulation? So it still stands that there can be no reliable data about effectiveness unless the number of times you have sex each month is factored into the equation. A person as educated as you are about contraception should understand what break-away ovulation is and also understand that you are spreading misinformation. I ask you again’ did this studay even take number of times people had sex into consideration? If not, then the data is useless. I could have a study with 100 virgins who use oral contraceptives and claim they were 100% effective. It would render the study useless.
If teens are having sex, especially if they are in relationships, I sincerely doubt that they will restrict themselves to one day a month! Condoms AND the pill are going to protect them in all but rare instances. I have no doubt that your form of NFP would be highly effective, but it certainly won’t work for those of us who have a spontaneous sex life and enjoy having sex more often.
That is why I said the drug pushers should name their corporation
“The Unplanned Sex Kingdom”
And I can guarantee you that my sex life with my wife is based on quality and not quantity. The misinformation you are spreading about contraception ‘protecting’ teens from unwanted pregnancy and giving teens the impression that having sex more frequently does not increase the possibility of conceiving a child is misinformation and frankly shows ignorance on a fundamental level. The proof lies in the fact that girls are getting pregnant all the time while taking all kinds of hormonal birth control cocktails from pills to daily oral doses to shots each month. Our teens are your guinea pigs and you get them to buy into lies and they end up getting pregnant while on birth control. Just a couple weeks ago Jill ran an article about a porn star that used birth control and she was tweeting about her sixth abortion. And you would have us believe that the amount of sexual activity you engage in is not related to wether or not a girl will conceive. You need to rethink this.
In my opinion, it is an act of cruelty to knowingly bring something like that into the world.
Hey Phony Joanie:
It’s an act of cruelty to bring somebody as severely empathy disabled as yourself into the world. I guess your mother was a very cruel person.
UPDATE 5/29, 10:05a: As reported by LifeNews.com and The Blaze, Flynt is not backing down from his comment. He wrote on Twitter May 27:
What I said is true. She knew that baby was Downs Syndrome. If she thought it would be something heroic or courageous to have this child, it’s her decision but I think she’s an idiot. I’m not ashamed of my statement.
If I could respond to him in person (which I may by Twitter, but I doubt it’d change his views), here’s what I’d say:
Ok, first of all Trig is a person with a disability and more than just his disability. On top of normal parenting issues which arise, It is challenging raising and caring for a child with a disability, so yes, she is to be commended. Also, Trig and other individuals with Down Syndrome are not a vegetable, have an average life span, & are very much aware of the environment around them. So Sarah Palin’s an idiot, why, because she choose to give birth to/raise a child with disabilities or really because you disagree with her political views? When it comes to skewed perceptions about the developmentally disabled, you sir are the idiot!
Learn About Down Syndrome
http://mylifeinreflection.blogspot.com/2010/05/down-syndrome.html
I just read this article and it disgusts me to read the ‘sickness’ of Larry Flynt. To attack a baby is even worse since he/she cannot defend their self. I will include him in the Divine Mercy Prayers. May God have mercy on his soul!!!!
Larry Flynt is a disgusting man. Trig Palin is a human being and a little cutie. I am pretty sure he’s aware of his surroundings. He may just look at the world a little differently than the rest of us.
This past weekend, my mom&dad and I and two of my my nieces took a trip to visit my 89 year old grandmother. Not sure if this young woman was the daughter or granddaughter of a resident, but there was a young woman there with Downs. She was aware of things and even pointed out to myself and my nieces the eggs in the birds nest in this glass cage that has various birds in it. She was NOT a vegetable.
Lauren, that video you posted was really neat. I liked seeing how the big sister was eager to hold her new baby sister. That was sweet. The little girl didn’t cringe or refuse to hold the baby.
Disabilities don’t make someone any less human!
HITLER and the NAZIs experimented on them! Do we need to keep reminding people of that?
Hi Rachel C,
A good friend of mine always said, “Mary, you never argue with an idiot. You laugh at idiots, you make fun of idiots, and you let them make fools of themselves but you never argue with one!” Certainly that is the situation here. What can you expect from this degenerate who made his millions degrading women and the people who helped him do it?
I think Gloria Steinem summed it up brilliantly.Post 11:28PM 5/29.
Alaina: I would argue that there is a clear difference between a fetus and a fully-developed viable human being, but we are not going to agree. I came on this board to find areas that pro-lifers and (semi)pro-choicers can agree on, not find the same points that people argue over and over and over.
The thing is, Alaina, is that we already do agree. You don’t realize it, but you agree that all humans gain rights by fact they are human organisms. This is obvious by the way you treat other similar humans, such as infants (not self aware/rational), people who cannot feel pain (unable to suffer physically), those in a persistent coma (again not rational, or able to feel pain), the mentally ill (not rational, possibly no hope to ever even become rational), the severely mentally handicapped (not rational in some cases with no hope to become rational), the elderly suffering from dementia (no longer rational, or self aware, etc), conjoined twins (do not have separate bodies and are unable to survive individually), breastfeeding babies (dependent physically on their mother’s bodies), and I could go on and on.
This is important, Alaina. I do not expect to change anyone’s mind on abortion. If you have a set of moral premises (that are non-contradictory) that allow for abortion, then there is no point in having a discussion. For example, some people don’t believe in any morals, and therefore any laws at all (although this is in reality a very tiny number.) My goal is not to convince someone to change their moral system. My goal is to show how abortion is unacceptable within most people’s already accepted moral system.
I am not arguing metaphysics here. I am arguing consistency.
Hi Rachel C.
That’s 11:08PM, not 11:28PM
Alaina, I personally have a friend who almost died (and was hospitalized) for blood clots in her legs from taking the pill. She does not smoke and she was in her late 20’s when it happened (hardly an “old woman”).
The pill has been instrumental in raising the number of women who develop breast cancer. Doctors have admitted this. In fact, its right in the pill insert. It is NOT safe.
As already pointed out, 40% of pill takers having side effects is pretty scary! Not anything to gloss over.
Hi Rachel C,
A good friend of mine always said, “Mary, you never argue with an idiot. You laugh at idiots, you make fun of idiots, and you let them make fools of themselves but you never argue with one!” Certainly that is the situation here. What can you expect from this degenerate who made his millions degrading women and the people who helped him do it?
I think Gloria Steinem summed it up brilliantly.Post 11:08PM 5/29.
by Mary on May 30, 2011 at 8:56 am
It sounds like your friend gave good advice :)
Also, indeed, from a feminist point of view, porn is degrading towards women because it objectifies women as nothing more than sex toys, to be used and disposed of for the sake of men getting off, while not empowering women, but exploiting them and exposing them to STDs/HIV, unwanted pregnancy, drugs, and psychological/relationship issues (as a result). But I supposed, this is an issue to further dive into at another time.
The thing is, Alaina, is that we already do agree. You don’t realize it, but you agree that all humans gain rights by fact they are human organisms. This is obvious by the way you treat other similar humans, such as infants (not self aware/rational), people who cannot feel pain (unable to suffer physically), those in a persistent coma (again not rational, or able to feel pain), the mentally ill (not rational, possibly no hope to ever even become rational), the severely mentally handicapped (not rational in some cases with no hope to become rational), the elderly suffering from dementia (no longer rational, or self aware, etc), conjoined twins (do not have separate bodies and are unable to survive individually), breastfeeding babies (dependent physically on their mother’s bodies), and I could go on and on.
by Oliver on May 30, 2011 at 9:45 am
Oliver, I feel that you have made a few misconceptions, which I would like to correct, and may in fact stregnthen your case.
-“people who cannot feel pain (unable to suffer physically)”
-“those in a persistent coma (again not rational, or able to feel pain)”
However, these individuals, even those in a coma can have some awareness and perceptions and can still feel emotions and can experience emotional pain.
-“the mentally ill (not rational, possibly no hope to ever even become rational)”
The severity of mental illness ranges on a spectrum from mild to moderate to severe and so this characteristic is not true of all forms of mental illness. This view reflects back to prior to the late 1960’s when there were inadequit treatments and the majority of those with mental illness were often institutionalized, often from a young age and against their will. Then, back in the 1960’s & 1970’s new, effective medications and treatments (cognitive behavioral therapy, ECT, etc) were found, and the de-institutionalization movement began with a focus in community-based treatment and increasing the success rate of treating mood disorders and serious mental illnesses (such as Disassociative Identity Disorder, Bipolar Disorder, and Schizophrenia) and focused on enabling individuals with a mental illness to reach their highest potential in their communities.
-“The severely mentally handicapped (not rational in some cases with no hope to become rational)”
Though those with moderate to severe mental retardation, or intellectual disability as the pproper terminology goes, seem not able to make rational decisions, they are able to make choices and are certainly teachable, should be encouraged to reach the full potential of their abilities, and still deserve the same dignity and respect as the rest of us.
-“the elderly suffering from dementia (no longer rational, or self aware, etc)”
Actually, like some of the other conditions mentioned above, the severity of dementia and Alzheimer’s falls along a spectrum, from mild (with least amount of functional and memory loss) in it’s early stages to severe (with almost total functional and memory loss), in it’s later stages, and the progression may vary from person to person, wherein clinicians measure orientation (person, person & family, place, and time), memory & cognition, and assess their ability to preform activities of daily living to determine their needs & treatment. Again, should be encouraged to reach the full potential of their abilities, and still deserve the same dignity and respect as the rest of us.
-“conjoined twins (do not have separate bodies and are unable to survive individually), breastfeeding babies (dependent physically on their mother’s bodies), and I could go on and on.”
I digress.
Alaina, birth control is a false assurance. I was on Yaz when I conceived my son. I took it the same time every day and was not on any medication so there was no reason I should have conceived, right? Yet I got pregnant.
The reason why I no longer take the pill is the fact that it is very dangerous for me (for any woman) unhealthy, unnatural…
It also can cause an early abortion by not allowing the baby to implant in the uterine lining. If we pro-lifers believe the scientifically accurate truth that the human life span starts at conception, then why would you expect us to be advocating something that can destroy a human in his or her earliest stage of life? Obviously, DUH, we’re not gonna condone that!
You say lets work together to reduce abortions. I’m okay with that, the only problem is that the abortion industry pays lip service to “lowering the number of abortions” yet fights tooth and nail against actually accomplishing that. Abby Johnson and Carol Everett, both who worked/owned abortion clinics attest to that fact. Abortion is money and they work to SELL MORE not less. You see it in the fact that they try to shut down CPC’s. Not like they provide any help to pregnant women themselves.. they only sell abortion. But they’ll be darned if they’re gonna actually let us offer women a different CHOICE. No way! No help for pregnant women so that ladies feel like they HAVE to get abortions.
Again, should be encouraged to reach the full potential of their abilities, and still deserve the same dignity and respect as the rest of us.
Ok, so the more extreme each of those cases are, the less of a person each one of those human beings should be treated as? This seems to be what you are saying. Do you not realize that each gestating human being has unlimited potential themselves?
Hehe, Xalisae, not at all! I’m someone who has a disability & has worked with individuals with disabilities for almost 3 years! I think you misunderstood what I said or the intentions. I’m saying quite the opposite! What I’m saying is that regardless of a person’s disability, we shouldn’t dismiss them as hopeless or incapable, they’re individual people with abilities and potential and we should recognize this and encourage them to set goals & reach their full potential beyond their disabilities!
For in case you all have forgotten, I’m pro-life from conception to natural death, and am an advocate for those with disabilities & mental illness.
Rachael C.
No, I do not have any misconceptions. “Thanks” for the concern though.
Of course there is a spectrum of mental illness and disability. I am not an idiot. If you would have taken a few minutes to actually think you might have recognized my point. My point is that there are humans who fail to meet the specific criteria put out by the typical pro-choice type. I listed several examples of people who sometimes fall into these categories. Hell, I even said “in some cases” a few times. Did I need to add an additional 300 words to my post to clarify? I figured people could use common sense and context clues to understand the post. I am sorry you don’t have those abilities.
You also don’t seem to know the definition of a rational being. Insects make choices. Rational beings make choices determined by their own will. Infants, SOME mentally ill, SOME demented, SOME mentally challenged, make choices based on inclination. Their wills are determined by wants and needs as presented by, and in, Nature. Rational beings are able to determine their own will REGARDLESS of wants and needs as determined by Nature.
Infants that cannot feel physical pain also cannot feel emotional pain because they have yet to achieve self actualization. They cannot suffer from any sort of pain in those cases. Yet we still give them human protection.
Rachael C: Oliver, I feel that you have made a few misconceptions, which I would like to correct, and may in fact stregnthen your case.
Of all of the stupid and self aggrandizing things you said in your post, this is the worst. You spent an entire post clumsily explaining how every one of my examples earned human rights and protections. My entire point was that you CANNOT earn these things. If you post were well done, or your point were at all logical (and not just a “hey look at me! I know stuff about disabilities!”) my point would be WEAKENED. I am trying to prove via introspection that everyone already agrees that human rights are intrinsic to humanity, and you tried to prove otherwise. No wonder X thought you were pro-choice.
Woah! Retract your claws and put down the defensive shield! I wasn’t attacking you & I certainly didn’t deserve to be attacked like that! I was just trying to contribute to the conversation and was speaking both from personal and professional experience. You could of disagreed with me without the personal attacks. I thought civility and human decency was one of the criteria for commenting here, but aparently I was wrong.
Oh come off it. You told me I had “misconceptions” about basic knowledge. You proceeded to talk down to me like a child. There was no point to your post other than to show me the “error” of my ways. I’d be fine if you had argued salient points, but you simply nitpicked what I said. You might as well have criticized my grammar.
Rachel, I am sorry that I reacted so harshly. I was upset that you misunderstood my point.
If educated women like Alaina can believe and spread misinformation like she does when she says “No, oral contraception’s effectiveness is not dependent on how often you have sex, not at all”; how easy it must be for Planned Parenthood (alias The Unplanned Sex and Abortuary Kingdom) to go into our schools and spread the same misinformation to our children.
@truthseeker,
Not gone, just had to get my lab done for my chem class, and some other studying done.
No, I am not spreading misinformation. You are mistaken about break away ovulation, it is not scientifically supported. Can you show me some peer-reviewed studies that show evidence of this? I went on PubMed and the American Chemical Society websites to see if recent peer-reviewed studies have come out to support your claims that I was not aware of, and cannot find a single study to support your claims. The evidence as of now points to no change of effectiveness of oral contraceptives regardless of amount of sexual activity, as compared to NFP with a failure rate of 15-25% in most studies. Unless you have scientific information the medical community is not aware of, then you are mistaken. I don’t need to rethink this, you do.
I have no idea what celebrity you are talking about, but do you really think someone unintelligent enough to get six abortions is taking her medication responsibly? Oral contraceptives are very effective taken properly and the evidence backs this up. Teens are notorious for improperly taking their medications, and are usually uninformed about the effects other medications can have on their contraception. Like I said before, the most common reasons of birth control failure is improper use and medication reactions. Less common is a female’s body reaction to the medication. Overweight and underweight women are particularly prone to the fluctuations in hormones that can cause the pill’s effectiveness to be reduced.
If you would like I can send you articles with PDFs of the studies supporting the effectiveness of birth control (the ones I am allowed to freely distribute). Or you can subscribe to PubMed and have access to a multitude of peer reviewed medical articles.
“ Alaina, I personally have a friend who almost died (and was hospitalized) for blood clots in her legs from taking the pill. She does not smoke and she was in her late 20?s when it happened (hardly an “old woman”).
The pill has been instrumental in raising the number of women who develop breast cancer. Doctors have admitted this. In fact, its right in the pill insert. It is NOT safe.
As already pointed out, 40% of pill takers having side effects is pretty scary! Not anything to gloss over.”
First off, my condolences to your friend for her experiences. I hope she is doing well now.
Secondly, no one is glossing over the side effects of birth control. I posted him here, they are in the package inserts. You seem to not understand that 40% is a comparable number to most pharmaceuticals as to side effects, including both major and minor. Major side effects comprise >1% of the effects. It sounds like your friend suffered from deep vein thrombosis (I am not a doctor, but this is one side effect associated with the pill). This is a very rare side effect, it happens in less than one percent of cases. I’m sure that is cold comfort to you and your friend, but sometimes medications cause ill effects. If I take aspirin I can either get tinnitus or even go into anaphylactic shock. My asthma medication increases my risk of lung disease. There is a risk with any medication. I am sorry your friend was one of the unlucky few that had an adverse event. Most side effects of birth control are very minor (break through bleeding, weight gain) and decrease with extended use, like many medications. Extended use of ibuprofen can cause kidney disease and even renal failure. Should no one take ibuprofen?
As to the increase in breast cancer, the pill can cause some increase in the risk of breast cancer overall. It can also reduce the risk of other kind of cancers. Other medications have comparable effects. It confuses me that people are so upset about this particular medication, when many other things we do every day increase cancer risk as well. Many medications, coffee, and alcohol, just to name a few substances, increase risk of various cancers. It happens. Many things cause increase in cancer risk, and science is still working on it. The risk is fairly low for most medications, including oral contraceptives.
@Oliver,
I do see your point. However, I don’t think making early term abortion illegal is going to fix the problem. I am unwilling to fight to make it illegal, because I don’t want it to move underground where people will be unable to offer counseling and help to needy women to assist them to making a decision not to abort.
Alaina: I do see your point. However, I don’t think making early term abortion illegal is going to fix the problem. I am unwilling to fight to make it illegal, because I don’t want it to move underground where people will be unable to offer counseling and help to needy women to assist them to making a decision not to abort.
Think about what you are saying here. Put it in the context of any other type of unjust killing, or rape. Would it be acceptable to say in a foreign country that rape should not be made illegal because then it will happen in more violent, underground conditions than in socially acceptable conditions? It doesn’t make sense. Besides, what portion would truly go underground anyways? What exactly would be underground? Probably the same types of doctors performing abortions would be performing them anyways. The only difference would be that at least some abortions would not happen because of the limitation and that our society could start moving towards a more pregnancy friendly, progressive environment. Right now, the solution to a woman’s pregnancy is to simply whisk it away. Talk about anti-woman. Why do we allow our society to pressure women into feeling the need to abort in the first place? Make it illegal and start building the infrastructure to properly support these pregnancies. We wouldn’t accept any less for any other crime/unjustice. (Heck, when it came down to it, the ending of slavery was a culture shock too.)
Alaina,
Are you saying you have never heard of break-away ovulation and do not now what it is or that you do not believe it ever occurs? I don’t know exactly what was done in the peer review study that was used to get the 99% effectiveness figure but you continue to defy logic with your position that having sex more often does not increase the posssibility of you getting pregnant. Follow the factoids below. Take special note of factoid#3 which states that one of the requirements to getting pregnant is to have sex just prior to or on the day of ovulation.
1) Birth control fails sometimes even when taken exactly according to recommended guideline.
2) If birth control fails and a woman gets pregnant that then means the woman must have ovulated.
3) When a woman ovulates she can only get pregnant if a man inseminates her just prior to or on the day of ovulation.
4) The chances that a man inseminates her just prior to or on the day of ovualtion are certain if she has sex every day. The same person would likely not get pregnant if she had only had sex one day that month.
Results: women who has sex every day gets pregnant and woman who does not have sex every day does NOT get pregnanat.
It is just common sense for crying out loud. How can you miss it? A woman is more likely to get oregnant if she has sex every day because if/when birth control fails it would be more likely that the egg would get fertilized during the one day window that the egg survives in the woman. How many ways can I say it? This is not rocket science. Let me give you a real simple example. Lets look at a woman whose birth control fails and she ovulates on the 20th day of her cycle. Now lets look at that scenario from both perspectives.
Perspective #1 is a woman who has sex every day that month. She gets inseminated on day 19 and her egg gets fertilized and conception occurs on day 20 when ovulation occurs.
Perspective #2 is a woman who only has sex twice that month. Once on day 8 of her cycle and once again on day 23 of her cycle and her egg does not get fertilized on and no conception occurs when ovulation occurs.
In that scenario even though the birth control fails for both women; the women who has sex is more likely to, and does actually conceive a child. While the woman who has sex less is less likely to, and actually does not conceive a child.
It is not rocket science. It takes two things to happen in order to get pregnant. When a woman has sex every day she WILL get pregnant any time she ovulates/her birth control fails. The less a woman has sex, the less likely she is to get pregnant when she ovulates/her birth control fails. And birth control does fail. Get your head out of the peer review statistics and look at it logically for a moment if you can. You are spreading terrible misinformation when you spead the lie ““No, oral contraception’s effectiveness is not dependent on how often you have sex, not at all”. To continue to insist on this after all the ways I have shown it to be false; you are going past failure to understand and entering denial territory.
Alaina said:
“You are mistaken about break away ovulation, it is not scientifically supported.”
Alaina, When I spoke of break away ovulation I was using the term as a simple way of describing when a woman’s birth control fails and an egg ‘breaks away’ and ovulation occurs even though she is taking birth control. Maybe you could clarify what you mean when you say that break away ovulation is not scientifically supported.
Do you have any idea how often a woman ovulates when on hormonal birth control? I think I recall somebody (the banishated Asitis to be precise) telling me that it occurs at least a couple times a year on average.
Truthseeker, just for the record:
Ovulation pus sex will not always mean pregnancy. Trust me, I’ve had sex while ovulating and not conceived many times.
But you are definitely correct that you cannot conceive without sex.
It seems like people have forgotten that pregnancy results from sex to a ridiculous extent sometimes. Look at what antibiotics say–my husband and I always laugh at them. It’s something like “This may interfere with birth control pills and cause pregnancy.” Pregnancy is not caused by a lack of birth control. Pregnancy is caused by sex.
Alaina, there is definitely evidence that breakthrough ovulation happens. Sydney’s son was conceived on the pill. I know 3 people for a fact who were conceived on the pill (and probably quite a few more that I just don’t know it). If some people get pregnant on the pill, they must be ovulating. And as Truthseeker pointed out, when a woman ovulates, there is only a small window of time–6 days max–that she could conceive. Sperm doesn’t survive long; 5 days at the outside in the right environment, and a woman’s reproductive system is not always hospitable 5 days before ovulation, especially if she’s on the pill (since part of how it works is changes in cervical fluids). The lifespan of the egg is even less–only 12 hours. So unless the woman has sex on the day of ovulation, or in the five days prior (probably less, but this would vary for individuals) she would not get pregnant. Since a period of abstinence of six days or less would result in no chance of pregnancy, the amount and/or timing of sex would absolutely matter. For a woman in a relationship having sex several times a week, it might not matter that much–but for a woman who has sex occasionally on dates, a few times a month, the timing would absolutely matter.
Judging the effectiveness of the pill by confirmed pregnancies is not necessarily a good method. Normal couples can take up to 6 months to conceive, so even having sex all the time won’t even lead to pregnancy. 65% of woman undergoing IVF do not “get pregnant” (experience implantation, I assume). Each month, 75% of women in their twenties and 85% of women in their thirties who are trying to get pregnant will fail. So each month on the pill, most women wouldn’t get pregnant anyway. The pill pregnancy rate should be compared to the natural pregnancy rate.
Also, most scientists believe that many early pregnancies do not survive–the embryo never implants, or is spontaneously miscarried at such a young age the mother may not know she is pregnant. These events are much more likely on the pill, because that is also how it works (something which women who are considering taking it are not told, when to some it would be a deal-breaker. I don’t find this respectful or pro-choice at all).
Since pregnancy is not guaranteed to those off the pill, and women on the pill may be experiencing pregnancies they simply do not know about (at a higher rate than women not using birth control, who are likely experiencing such events too), simply saying that each year 95% of women on the pill don’t get pregnant doesn’t tell the whole story. And a small chance of pregnancy each cycle over many years of contraceptive use means that a large percentage of contraceptive users will eventually experience an unplanned pregnancy. I have been having “unprotected sex” for the past 7 years with only 3 confirmed pregnancies and 2 live births. That means that for me, the lots of sex method of birth control had a 29%-43% failure rate. If this statistic is reliable, in the coming year as I continue to have lots of sex, I have less than a 50% chance of becoming pregnant.
It’s kind of depressing. Luckily, there’s a lot that these statistics leave out. (The lots of sex method of birth control is not for everyone.)
By the way, I’ve heard the chance of miscarriage is increased for as much as a year following pill use. I don’t recall ever being warned about that by a doctor either.
Had someone told me there was a chance that the pill could kill a newly conceived baby, I never would have considered it. I think this needs to be part of the process of prescribing the pill. I also would think that anyone who is truly pro-choice would agree with me. (Some people who claim to be pro-choice have not agreed with me on this; that’s not aimed at you, Alaina, as you seem very reasonable.)
Thank you ycw, I was just going to point that out.
Um hello Alaina! My son WAS CONCEIVED while I was on the pill. You are such an elitist. I must be stupid and unintelligent right if I can’t take bc properly! I took it at the SAME TIME every day and was on no other medications that would interfere with the pill yet here is my living, breathing, walking, talking 4 year old to tell you I don’t need to read a “peer reviewed” study to KNOW that ovulation can occur while on the pill. There was another commenter here on Jill’s that had a miscarriage when she got pregnant on the pill and the docs had warned her that was a possibility because the pill compromises the uterine lining. Heck, if you read the package insert that comes WITH THE PILL the manufacturers even admit that the pill can allow ovulation and that it thins the lining of the uterus (this is one reason they claim the pill will make your periods lighter).
Why would any woman getting 6 abortions be “unintelligent” as you say. I thought we shouldn’t judge women who get abortions and that its not murder so who cares how many they get and for what reasons? Its HER BODY right? Maybe a woman getting 6 abortions just doesn’t want to put bc pills into HER BODY. Who are YOU “Alaina the elitist” to judge what CHOICE she makes? What a hypocrite you are! A snooty one!
ycw and Sydney,
I know ovulaion plus sex does not guarantee pregnancy. The point I was making is that ovulation and sex are both simulataneously required in order to have even a possibility of conceiveing; and that it is a lie to tell women that having sex every day does not increase your chances of getting pregnant on the pill. It is just patently and obviously false for Alaina to repeat those Planned Parenthood talking points. Those talking points about are designed to get women to feel the false “safe” sex mentality that leads them into promiscuity and conception when birth control fails. It is just unbelievable to me that they teach women that “in the magical world of birth control the chances of getting pregnant do not increase when you have sex”. They get otherwise seemingly rational women and girls to buy into a lie as fundamental as ”when on birth control having sex every day doesn’t increase your chances of getting pregnant”. If somebody as educated and supposedly learned about birth control as Alaina can buy into that lie and spread it, then it means large numbers of the younger generation (and girls like Anna the fifteen year old who posted a couple days ago on this thread) are being fed that same misinformation about birth control. I don’t understand how they can get away with publishing effectiveness statistics from studies that don’t even take the number of times you have sex into consideration when having sex is required in order to actualy get pregnant. ” It is not rocket science and it is the type of misinformation that is sure lead many women into increasing the likelihood that they will get pregnant while taking birth control. I am certain this factors into the statistic that over 50% of all abortions are commited on girls who were using birth control. I don’t understand how a drug company can get away with publishing pregnancy prevention statistics from studies that don’t even take the number of times you have sex into consideration when it is patently obvious that having sex is required in order to actualy get pregnant. What percentage of girls and women actually buy into the same lie that Alaina does?
Hi truthseeker! I didn’t question your point… just so you know! I was responding only to ycw who was responding to Alaina. And I agree with your premise btw!
@ truthseeker:
Yes, I do get what you’re saying. Protection wasn’t quite the word I was looking for. I personally know that the pill can have dangerous side effects and stuff because after my doctor tried (as a last resort) to put me on the pill for a lighter period, about a month later, I was hospitalized for what doctors originally thought was appendicitis, but actually turned out to be a severe allergic reaction to something in the pill that had built up in my system.
On the false notion of ”protection”, a lot of these people simply misused something or hadn’t been taugh the proper ways to use each method or multiple methods. (Or they may have combined two methods that can render each other useless, like male AND female condoms being used at the same time.) Not everybody is as lucky as your daughter and as I have been to learn most of what I know from my parents. But even they didn’t really talk much to me about contraception, I had to read up on it on my own. A lot of kids think the health classes are kind of a joke and don’t pay as much attention to them as they should. Teachers, and even people from outside the classroom can have a very tough time talking to today’s teenagers. It’s almost impossible to get a lot of them to listen. I think it would help if the speakers that came into the class were closer to our own age and that would be because we’re more likely to take what our peers say seriously, as opposed to a random teacher or stranger.
Carder: With the exception of this statement:
Sarah Palin is the dumbest thing.
Thats dogma among libs and choicers.
And among many conservatives and Republicans too.
Anna said:
“On the false notion of ”protection”, a lot of these people simply misused something or hadn’t been taugh the proper ways to use each method or multiple methods.”
Anna, thanks again for sharing your perspective. The point I was making is that people like Alaina are spreading misinformation that puts people like you into a ‘false’ sense of protection that causes you to act in less responsible ways like thinking the number of times you have sex is not relevant to the chances you will conceive. Perhaps you do not believe it when she says “No, oral contraception’s effectiveness is not dependent on how often you have sex, not at all”. But it goes even beyond that. The entire effectiveness’ study that they use to convince women of their misinformation about probability of getting pregnant on birth control did not even take into account the number of times the people had sex. Just look at the insert in the birth control medication you get. How/when did you learn about break away ovulation? Does the pamphlet that comes with your birth control teach you about it? Or does the pamphlet that comes with your birth control disseminate (pun intended) misleading information like ‘hormonal birth control is just as effective regardless of the number of times you have sex’. It sounds insidious but more sex means more unintended pregnancies which means more abortions and that is their money maker. Do they teach you about break away ovulation in your health class when they talked about birth control? Or did they teach girls the Planned Parenthood talking points that ‘hormonal birth control is just as effective regardless of how many times you have sex’ and ‘birth control protects you from pregnancy’?
Thanks again for posting and in any case I hope that you can now spread the truth to your friends so they do not behave irresponsible ways cause they think the magic birth control pill gives them the protection and with birth control the number of times they have sex doesn’t effect the likelihood that they will get pregnant. I know it sounds silly.
Anna,
You are correct about there being multple forms of birth control and NFP is useful wether you take birth control or not. Obviously abstinence is the only 100% effective method. For pro-life people we need to be willing to at least have enough self control to reduce the number of times we have sex unless/until we are willing to support and raise children of our own. When a pro-life person gets pregnant we are not willing to accept abortion as a form of birth control so we are driven to greater restraint and greater responsibility for our actions. Pro-life people have a greater stake in getting the right information out and I hope you can share this with your friends. Birth control or not; promiscuity leads to pregnancy.
Another bit of information Anna. Hormonal birth control actually can/does cause abortion; and more often than you might think. Most people who are on birth control for extended period of time do have break away ovulations that get fertilized but they miscarry because the birth control keeps the uterus from accepting the embryo. Many pro-life women have stopped using hormonal birth control once they find this out.