Given everything else that needs to get done, and considering that nothing can be done about it beyond grand-standing and toothless legislative attempts.... A candidate should be admonished for making it an important platform issue.Posted by: cameron at May 31, 2007 10:12 AM
Should Abortion Be A Litmus Test?
Yes, it should the most important issue of the campaign, especially for the party of Life, the republicans. The party of death (the democrats) will have their litmus test too, no pro-lifers need apply.Posted by: jasper at May 31, 2007 11:12 AM
Don't know if this is the proper blog for this post, but I just thought you should see this, Jill.
Posted by: Lyssie
at May 31, 2007 11:17 AM
It's a link to the American Cancer Society's latest study on the Abortion-Breast Cancer link, or lack thereof. Enjoy.
No, some one's abortion opinion, should not be the most important issue when choosing a candidate for the office of President.
In no particular order: Health-care, Social security, taxes, national debt, the war in Iraq, the Education system.
I find those ^ more important than abortion. I would rather have a pro-life candidate in office then a pro-choice candidate who has crappy opinions on the other issues at hand.Posted by: midnite678 at May 31, 2007 11:52 AM
I would think that would be up to each person, wouldn't it? There are some people who are fairly apathetic about abortion: I'd say that majority of people wouldn't make it a priority. I'd never vote for a pro-life candidiate, but it isn't the most important issue for me, either. The shameful "war" in Iraq takes that place, with education and other rights issues following closely behind.Posted by: HumanAbstract at May 31, 2007 12:41 PM
Please refer to www.abortionbreastcancer.com for the most up to date research and studies. You can't go by just one. There are numerous studies that at the very least, should generate some concern. Review what is on there and draw your own conclusions. These studies are both national and international.Posted by: Mary at May 31, 2007 12:53 PM
Mary, thanks, but having visited numerous biased pro-choice and pro-life backed sites, I am wont to declare that site biased. I prefer organizations that, like ACS, provide unbiased information not based on their stance on abortion but on their fervor to find the causes and put a stop to cancer. They explored a medical procedure that people claimed to cause cancer, or at least claimed to contribute to breast cancer, and came to the conclusion that it did not, in fact, do so. Given the parameters of the study, I am fairly inclined to believe that it is more statistically accurate.
Thanks anyway.Posted by: Lyssie at May 31, 2007 3:00 PM
That is certainly your decision but why do you assume this site is biased? Look at the studies and organizations conducting them. From what I can see they are neither pro-choice or pro-life. Read what the studies say. They come from around the world and the US.
There have been numerous studies implicating vaccines in autism. What would you advise parents? To look at one study and just accept it, or to look objectively at research on both sides of the issue before drawing any conclusions.
I've reviewed the breast cancer studies over and over again, and evaluating scientific research happens to be in my area of expertise. Bottom line, there is little or no evidence to suggest a link between breast cancer and abortion. Conservative conclusions find that if there is a risk, it is a trivially small one. A commmon problem with the few studies that do find a link, is that they did not consider that women who have kids are less likely to get breast cancer. The more kids you have, the lower your risk of getting breast cancer. Comparing people who've had four or five kids to people who've never wanted kids and had one or two abortions is methodologically flawed, and the reason they seem to think they have a causality.
Rather than visiting web sites for you cancer related research... just try doing your own search. eg
Whith biomed, you can disregard anything older than 5 years usually unless there isn't much else to go with.
if there are still a lot of studies... look for the meta-analysis.
look at how often the article was cited (e.g. impact/relative importance among peers).
Read the abstract
abstracts that seem to counter what everyone else is finding (i.e. minority reports) should be further scrutinized. First and foremost look at statistical power (how many samples... how representative are the samples). How meaninful is the finding (e.g. the BC breast cancer finding's not particularly meaninful). There should be something unique about their methods, and they should explain clearly why they approached the problem the way they did. Generally, minority reports aren't interested in advancing the science so much as ideological campaigning, pandering for funding, or attempting to catalogue the short-comings of others. Occasionally, the minority report is the bold and exciting thing that really does advance the science... and it will be cited often or be relatively new.
You are free to draw whatever conclusions you want, but the studies showing a connection are not few. Again, you can look at anything you want and believe what you will, I am just saying the studies on this site are many and extensive and women have the right to be advised of these studies and should be, and at the very least, encouraged to do their own objective research. Sadly this is not the case.
Let any other thing be a possible carcinogen, usually based on far less evidence, and we hear about it. Why the silence on a possible abortion breast cancer link?
Like with vaccines, any type of carcinogens, or the "safety" of a medication, I say do your own objective research and don't blindly accept the findings of one side.
Mary - While I agree with you that no one should ever base their ideas on one study, the ACS's report on the current reality/falsity of abortion-breat cancer link DOES cite several studies including its own research. It includes the National Cancer Institute's caucous which brought together 100 specialists who unanimously agreed after studying the available research, came to the conclusion that there was no link, and gave it their highest rating (well established). The ACS article also cites the American College of Obstetricians and Gynocologists study, which independently reviewed the findings of the NCI's caucous and agreed with their findings. They also cited the Demark study and reported it to be free of recall bias while also being one of the largest studies which came to the conclusion there was no link. They also mentioned an Oxford study (which I believe abortionbreastcancer.com picks apart, but I also picked apart that essay and found it to be rather flawed in its claims).
So I recommend you read the ACS link, as it is quite well informed and full of many separate citations, not just one singular study.Posted by: Rocky at May 31, 2007 4:58 PM
Two of my co workers are both deceased from breast cancer. One lady was in her late 40's and the other was 56. Both women had confided in me that they'd had abortions. One lady had 2. My point? How do we know that their abortions weren't a contributing factor?Posted by: Heather4life at May 31, 2007 5:06 PM
Come on Mary. There are no studies at your web site.
Please point me to one of these "current" research efforts, as I don't have time to read all the snow-balling tripe.
Just pick one and I'll look at it.Posted by: Cameron at May 31, 2007 5:21 PM
I read the ACS link, and I also know of Ph.D who disputed it. His name is Dr. Joel Brind. His studies and analyses of data are on the site I mentioned. My argument Rocky is that you do your own research, remain objective, look at both sides of the argument, and never assume one study is the end-all be-all. It isn't.
I would also recommend you visit the site, go to the sidebar on the right and visit the links to the National Cancer Institute where you will find opposing viewpoints.
Look again Cameron. Go to "quick jump" and take your pick of sites. If you go to the research one you will find numerous studies.Posted by: Mary at May 31, 2007 5:38 PM
Come on Mary. There are no studies at your web site.
Please point me to one of these "current" research efforts, as I don't have time to read all the snow-balling tripe.
Just pick one and I'll look at it.
Posted by: Bethany
at May 31, 2007 6:00 PM
Hey, Mr. ImascientificresearchevaluatorbutIcantevenfigureouthowtosearchawebsite.... click the image on the first page you come to. It's that simple. Then you're in the website, where all the links are.
Cameron doesn't really want to look. The truth might scare him.Posted by: Heather4life at May 31, 2007 6:02 PM
That's my point, we don't. There is also a disproportionate number of black women dying from breast cancer. Black women also have a disproportionate number of abortions. A connection? I can't prove it. But it makes one wonder. Its the same with the vaccine/autism connection. With all the studies and opinions I've heard, one study will not convince me there is not such a connection, though other people may view the same studies and differ with me altogether. Fine.
I am just saying there is the possibility, women have a right to know this, and should be encouraged to objectively research and draw their own conclusions. No one study, on either side, should be the end-all be-all.
Yes, I couldn't agree more, Heather and Mary. (And Mary, not only Autism, but SIDS worries me too, as being possibly caused by vaccines.)Posted by: Bethany at May 31, 2007 6:11 PM
and sids is hugely "misdiagnosed" Many or most sids related deaths are not reported as "adverse reactions" because they don't bother to find out long ago a vaccine was given.Posted by: luvmy5kids at May 31, 2007 6:17 PM
Here are some celebrities who all admit to having abortions. In addition to their abortions, they all had breast cancer. Sondra Locke [actress/ former girlfriend of Clint Eastwood] had 2 abortions and had a double mastectomy. Gloria Steinem had breast cancer. Suzanne Somers [actress] had breast cancer. Linda Ellerbee [journalist] mastectomy. Nope, no connection at all.Posted by: Heather4life at May 31, 2007 6:28 PM
I went to the page, and there are many links to research articles... however most don't seem to have any direct effort regarding OC. And most of the articles are over 10 years old.
Again, pick one of these articles you are so smitten with, and lets discuss that article.
What's wrong? Scare?Posted by: Cameron at May 31, 2007 6:35 PM
Stilll.... the point was that Mary is supposed to be on top of all this, yet she doesn't seem to be able to pick something specific she's willing to discus.Posted by: Cameron at May 31, 2007 6:38 PM
Look again Cameron, there are more recent articles. Even if some articles are over 10 years old, has human biology changed since then?Posted by: Mary at May 31, 2007 6:42 PM
Research linking lung cancer to cigarettes is over 40 years old. Is it irrelevant?Posted by: Mary at May 31, 2007 6:51 PM
"has human biology changed since then"
Science certainly has.
Buck up and pick one weeeny.Posted by: Cameron at May 31, 2007 6:52 PM
Mary, you are smarter than him, so here he goes with the name calling. Cameron, you need anger management classes. Has anyone ever told you that?Posted by: Heather4life at May 31, 2007 6:55 PM
Back to the original question......
I don't think you should vote for someone based on just one thing (be it their stance on abortion or anything else). I believe you should factor in all their views as a whole. I would vote for a pro life candidate if they held other views that I agreed with (such as health care, the economy, the war, education, etc.) Too often this is not the case, however, because too many politicians take the cookie cutter route and take up stances based on party lines.Posted by: JK at May 31, 2007 6:58 PM
How about Koch's Postulates, established by Robert Koch in 1890, that are still used today to determine if a newly discovered disease is caused by a microorganism. He was the first scientist to devise a series of proofs for the Germ Theory of Disease. His postulates were used to determine the cause of Anthrax.
Certainly these postulates must be irrelavent, they're over 100 years old.
Amen and thank you.Posted by: Mary at May 31, 2007 7:08 PM
Good point though I am not one to vote for a candidate that supports abortion. I like Giuliani but I'm not really certain of his stand on abortion. I also like Romney but want more clarification on his abortion stand. Actually, I'd just like a political off-year which we obviously are not going to get!Posted by: Mary at May 31, 2007 7:47 PM
Mary, I feel the same as you do.Posted by: Heather4life at May 31, 2007 8:00 PM
I think Guiliani's dilemma when it comes to abortion is that he thinks, being a Republican, you are required to be pro-life. But he is from New York, where he could get a good number of pro choice votes, based on his 9-11 record. I think he is trying to play both sides (though he is doing a horrible job). On one hand if he angers New Yorkers- no presidency; on the other if he angers red state America by appearing as a liberal New Yorker- no presidency.Posted by: JK at May 31, 2007 8:07 PM
9/11 is where I really admire Giuliani. I also feel he is someone who would stand up to terrorism and take a strong stand on immigration. Again, his abortion stand is a sticky issue for me. I just want to be more certain where he stands. You're right JK, he is trying to play both sides. I am also liking Romney more and more as well. Well, I'm just glad the election isn't tomorrow!Posted by: Mary at May 31, 2007 8:29 PM
Bill Oreilly exposed "tiller the baby killer" last night again. Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius is covering for the killer.
Fox News host Bill O’Reilly rebounded from a six-month silence to issue a scathing segment on the notorious late-term abortionist George R. Tiller that aired the evening of May 30. During the segment, O’Reilly blasted Tiller for “executing fetuses” for “vague medical reasons.”
He was equally critical of Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, who vetoed a bill that would have required Tiller to provide specific medical reasons for abortions after 21 weeks of pregnancy.
“Incredibly, Gov. Sebelius is protecting Tiller,” O’Reilly said during his broadcast. “And Gov. Sebelius is allowing him to continue the slaughter. How the governor sleeps at night is beyond me.”Posted by: jasper at May 31, 2007 8:47 PM
Abortion should be a litmus test for social conservatives to let their party's leadership know we won't be useful idiots any more. There are plenty of pro-life statesmen in the U.S. Whether they make it to nomination depends on the party's willingness to advance politics that can secure the party's future. If social conservatives refuse to be doe-eyed idiots for an election cycle or two, maybe the party will understand.
Better a true enemy than a false friend. I'd vote for Hillary before voting for a pro-choice or ambivalent Republican.Posted by: rasqual at May 31, 2007 8:47 PM
I adore Bill O'Reilly! The poor guy gets so much criticism, but Bill doesn't care. He just keeps on plugging along.Posted by: Heather4life at May 31, 2007 8:50 PM
I know Heather, I like him because he's practically the only one in the MSM that will cover this stuff.
(maybe Glenn Beck too)
You will not see this on ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC or PBS.Posted by: jasper at May 31, 2007 8:54 PM
We're so fortunate to have alternative news sources including O'Reilly and talk radio. I remember the 1994 elections when the Republicans swept both houses. The sour look on the faces of the major network newspeople announcing the election results was a sight to behold. They could have tried a lot harder to hide their disappointment. One news broadcaster even accused the American people of having a temper tantrum! The MSM media biased? Nah!Posted by: Mary at May 31, 2007 8:59 PM
The only problem with ANY study is that it shows a correlation & one must remember back to elementary statistics (or Intro to Psychology) that correlation DOES NOT = causation.
Just wanted to throw that out there for everyone...
Carry on...Posted by: midnite678 at May 31, 2007 9:06 PM
Ah yes, because PBS is so evil.
*eyeroll*Posted by: Rae at May 31, 2007 9:07 PM
I also like Glen Beck. I enjoy Rush and Sean Hannity as well. I don't watch or listen to them religously, but I do like them. You're right about the other channels, which I never bother watching. Do you remember the days when our only options were ABC, NBC, and CBS and Phil Donahue was THE talk show to watch?Posted by: Mary at May 31, 2007 9:07 PM
For my part, as a 25-year NPR listener I'll never forget the day Nina Totenberg, upon seeing Clarence Thomas confirmed before her incredulous eyes, let down her guard entirely and vocalized her concern that Thomas should recuse himself from any cases involving parties who also happened to testify against his confirmation in the hearings. It was an amazing moment.
Two NPR women amaze me. Ms. Totenberg for her 30 year tenacity in trying to personally, as a journalist, sustain the activist balance on the court, and Anne Garrels for her amazing, prolonged, at-risk coverage in Iraq -- rare for a woman her age.
Well, and then there's Libby Lewis, who NPR let cover the Lewis Libby affair. Everyone I knew was confused for a month. ;-)Posted by: rasqual at May 31, 2007 9:09 PM
Good point. That is why we objectively research both sides of an issue and draw our own conclusions.Posted by: Mary at May 31, 2007 9:10 PM
those were the days when liberals owned the entire media. Now they don't have that same power and they whine about Rush and FoxNews all of the time.Posted by: jasper at May 31, 2007 9:12 PM
Bill seems to be the only one with enough guts to tackle this issue. He even interviewed Kelly. This 20 year old girl spoke to Bill about her abortion at Tiller [the baby Killer's] clinic. She told Bill that she was 14 at the time of her abortion and was forced to give birth to her son over a toilet bowel. This is to make sure that the baby will drown if he is born alive. Kelly is now very traumatized. I am so glad that Bill exposed that baby killing monster.Posted by: Heather4life at May 31, 2007 9:12 PM
I agree with you, one must draw a conclusion, but alas, the conclusion could be false or positive, one will never really know.Posted by: midnite678 at May 31, 2007 9:12 PM
PBS does have some good shows though; Barney, Clifford the Big Red dog, etc.Posted by: jasper at May 31, 2007 9:16 PM
Speaking of Phil Donahue, I was disappointed to hear that his wife is pro choice. Her name escapes me though. Her father runs the hospital for kids with cancer. I know as soon as I hit my post button I'll remember her dog gone name.Posted by: Heather4life at May 31, 2007 9:23 PM
Marlo Thomas.Posted by: Heather4life at May 31, 2007 9:24 PM
@Jasper: Nova is pretty good, they also have really good documentaries, I remember a really fascinating one about hantavirus. Scared the crap out of me but I couldn't turn away...it was like a bad traffic accident.Posted by: Rae at May 31, 2007 9:24 PM
Ms. Totenberg was afraid that what goes around comes around perhaps? She broke the Hill/Thomas story to begin with. I'm sure she hoped for a different ending to that saga. What a disgusting farce that was.Posted by: Mary at May 31, 2007 9:29 PM
Yea, PBS does have some good documentaries, but when it comes to politics, they'll cover for the libs every time. ( Bill Moyers)Posted by: jasper at May 31, 2007 9:30 PM
@Jasper: Better dead than red I always say. :-pPosted by: Rae at May 31, 2007 9:32 PM
I remember Nova but not ever watching it. Is it still around at all? There is such a huge variety of channels now. I love History, Discovery, TLC, Geography, and A and E. Many years ago HBO was good, great documentaries and specials but it got so violent and gruesome I cancelled it. NOT my idea of entertainment.Posted by: Mary at May 31, 2007 9:34 PM
@Mary: It was on there a few years back, but I have a hard time finding decent documentaries outside of the various ones about Hitler on the History Channel. I love watching Mythbusters on Discovery and Miami Ink on TLC. I wish I had Discovery Health or the BBC channel but my family doesn't have uber-cable. Sad day. :(
I love Law and Order and House, so I constantly watch USA and TNT. :DPosted by: Rae at May 31, 2007 9:39 PM
O'Reilly epitomizes the problem with people like you: morality is about self-promotion more so than anything else. It's no surprise you idolize him.Posted by: Cameron at May 31, 2007 9:39 PM
That probably explains why people will look at the same data and draw entirely different conclusions. People will also believe or not believe what they want. A very dear friend of mine who is a special ed. teacher is convinced vaccines do not cause autism. I'm open to the possibility. We each draw our own conclusions from the same data. Whatever, I just try to keep an open mind.Posted by: Mary at May 31, 2007 9:41 PM
If you believe in God, you must believe that He is Holy. If He is Holy, Merciful, but also a God of Justice, just how long do you think He will spare this great country if we continue with abortion?
This is my opinion: Abortion is the most serious threat we face as a nation. If we do not rescind Roe v. Wade soon we should expect God to lift His hand of protection from our country.
For non-believers, I know you think it's tripe, vacuos and lazy (thanks Cameron), however, just ponder for a minute that it might be true.
Cameron, in a way you are a moral guy. I mean you see being pro-choice as a way of protecting women, right? Well, if God loves life and innocent babies in the womb can't you see Him reacting as you would react to something you felt so strongly about? Yes, you could deny that He exists, however, you have no proof of that, really, and to dismiss the possibility would be foolish, no, esepcailly for a scientist?
I mean when you are proposing a theory, don't you have to look at all possibilities and then either prove or disprove them one by one? If the existence of God is not disprovable, then you can't simply discount the possibility. At least you have to consider it to be an unknown.
So, we who are pro-life feel and believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that God exists, we must then ask ourselves what is that God like. Does a God who is active in the conception of human beings in the womb just a cruel God who likes then to see these defenseless and innocent creatures killed and ripped apart after they were concieved? Or, is He a God that is certainly upset by abortion but because he loves non-bleievers as much as anyone and wishes that no one perish, is He simply being patient and merciful?
PBS "covering the libs" is a self-realized end for conservatives, as they often refuse or decline to take part.Posted by: Cameron at May 31, 2007 9:43 PM
I stopped watching Mythbusters when they put some dead pig in a car to decompose over several weeks. How repulsive. They wanted to prove the stench of death lingers? Well, dahh
I enjoy Discovery Health and some reality shows.
I watch very little network TV. I didn't even know what the big deal about "Friends" was.
I nominate Len Munsil for President.
He's the real thing.
Go to his blog www.lenmunsil.comPosted by: HisMan at May 31, 2007 9:48 PM
Assuming there is a god, I then have to pick which one. It sounds like your talking about old testiment punisher destroyer god.... Ironically, the biblical versus which seem to suggest abortion is OK also mostly appear in old testament (e.g. King Solomon's laments). New testament god is a forgiving however. You could drink fetus fetus smoothies every morning, but so long as you beleive in him.. it's all good.Posted by: Cameron at May 31, 2007 9:48 PM
Cam, there's a mother who has a 39 week old fetus that she wants to abort, the fetus is heathly and everthing is fine. You know at this stage the unborn baby can survive on it's own.
Does the mother have the right to abort the baby?Posted by: jasper at May 31, 2007 9:50 PM
Is this for real, or are you just throwing me a hypothetical so you can engage in your ussualy accusatory semantics?Posted by: Cameron at May 31, 2007 9:51 PM
Oh yes, and I like Law and Order as well. Sometimes the endings leave you hanging, like was justice really done? Would I have voted with the jury? I love the late Jerry Ohrbach on the show. His wit and sarcasm add something and if its other detectives, I usually don't watch.Posted by: Mary at May 31, 2007 9:52 PM
Is this for real, or are you just throwing me a hypothetical so you can engage in your ussualy accusatory semantics?
No. There's no reason they can't or shouldn't induce or do c-section... as aborting such a load would be just as arduous if not more risky for the mothers health.Posted by: Cameron at May 31, 2007 9:52 PM
hypo Cam. Does she have the right to bodily autonomy at this point?Posted by: jasper at May 31, 2007 9:53 PM
certainly has the right to bodily autonomy, however the fetus is now a baby and doesn't need her body to survive.Posted by: Cameron at May 31, 2007 9:55 PM
Ok, so Cam says she doesn't have the right bodily autonomy at this point. When does the mother have the right to bodily autonomy? 30 weeks, 25? viability?Posted by: jasper at May 31, 2007 9:57 PM
"certainly has the right to bodily autonomy"
the she should be able to abort (if she wanted to) why not?Posted by: jasper at May 31, 2007 9:59 PM
Cam I dont understand why you bothered to answer his silly question...Posted by: midnite678 at May 31, 2007 9:59 PM
@Mary: Oh I loved Jerry Orbach, I was crushed when I found out he passed on. The show is definitely NOT the same without him (though Jesse Martin does a fantastic job). I still love Mythbusters, but that pig one was pretty nasty. Personally, I just love the explosions :D
I agree about the Law and Order hangers...like sometimes they don't give the verdict and I just get like WHAAAAT!? COME ON! I WANNA KNOW! I love SVU, sometimes the stories are like, "Oh my goodness!!" but the acting is fabulous (Detective Stabler is also some pleasant eye-candy...)Posted by: Rae at May 31, 2007 10:00 PM
The mother always has the right to bodily autonomy Jismper.Posted by: Cameron at May 31, 2007 10:09 PM
That he is, Rae.
I think, though, my favorite is Detective Munch.Posted by: Heather B. at May 31, 2007 10:09 PM
oh Rae, another thing we agree upon. How lovely.. I am obsessed with SUV (well just L&O in general), but I cant take the guy detecitve seriously in Criminal Intent (possibly b/c he played Gomer Pile in 'Full Metal Jacket'.Posted by: midnite678 at May 31, 2007 10:09 PM
I don't watch the other Law and Orders. Mariska Hargitay of SVU is the daughter of the late actress Jayne Mansfield, a blond bombshell from my childhood. She died in a horrible car accident and I believe Mariska was with her. Jayne had become a very tragic figure. I'm glad to see Mariska doing so well.Posted by: Mary at May 31, 2007 10:11 PM
"Cam I dont understand why you bothered to answer his silly question..."
Sometimes I think they're going to actually have something thoughtful to say. Sometimes, I'm just curious how stupid they can act.Posted by: email@example.com at May 31, 2007 10:11 PM
@Midnite: Oh I love Vincent D'onofrio because I didn't see Full Metal Jacket until after I became obsessed with Criminal Intent (though I did get sick of it after awhile, the crimes were boring and they added Chris Noth...blech!).
@Heather: Oh Detective Munch, he is so awesome. I wish they did more Fin/Munch interaction on the show, because Richard Belzer and Ice-T are fantastic together!Posted by: Rae at May 31, 2007 10:12 PM
Interesting thought to ponder over while I get ready for some sleepy time. I am off to bed while watching 'The Black Dahlia'.
Hope everyone has a lovely night!
*blows kiss @ Cam*Posted by: midnite678 at May 31, 2007 10:13 PM
then why did you just contradict yourself Cam. I asked if a mother could abort a 39 week old fetus and you said "No".
If she can't abort a 39 week old fetus ( let's say from some reason she doesn't want a c-section or deliver) she wants to abort,.. why can't she abort if she has the right to bodily autonomy.Posted by: jasper at May 31, 2007 10:15 PM
Detective Munch! He's so homely he's cute, at least I think so. He also played on another homicide show, I think it was supposed to be in Cleveland or Baltimore.Posted by: Mary at May 31, 2007 10:15 PM
Oh Rae, how could not *love* Chris Noth?
Maybe because I am obsessed with Sex and the City? hhhmmmm, will ponder that during my sleep and get back to you on it.Posted by: midnite678 at May 31, 2007 10:17 PM
"He's so homely he's cute, at least I think so."
I know! And who wouldn't love the sarcasm he always uses?Posted by: Heather B. at May 31, 2007 10:20 PM
@Mary: It was "Homicide: Life on the Street". Richard Belzer has played the character of John Munch on several other TV shows like the X-Files (which I really want to see some day), the original Law and Order series and a few others in addition to the Homicide series and SVU.
He is cute in a homely way, I agree. I like his ears.Posted by: Rae at May 31, 2007 10:21 PM
Silly me, all this time I thought someone must have an abortion or they do not have bodily autonomy! What's a guy to do for bodily autonomy? OMG... nobody's killed me yet either, and I guess I don't have a right to life unless someone kills me. OMG... etc...Posted by: Cameron at May 31, 2007 10:29 PM
No Cam, the mother wants to abort at 39 weeks, why can't she. you said she had the right to bodily autonomy. It's a very simple question Cam, why are you having so much trouble with it.Posted by: jasper at May 31, 2007 10:34 PM
speaking of having trouble... since when is bodily autonomy synonimous with a medical procedure? Having the baby removed intact and denying the abortion does not violate the woman's bodily autonomy so long as the baby is removed per her request.Posted by: Cameron at May 31, 2007 10:49 PM
"Having the baby removed intact and denying the abortion does not violate the woman's bodily autonomy so long as the baby is removed per her request."
No Cam bodily autonomy means the mother has control over what she can do with her body. If her request is to have the abortion, then she should be able to have it.Posted by: jasper at May 31, 2007 10:56 PM
since when is bodily autonomy synonimous with a medical procedure?
because you pro-aborts say that in-order to have bodily autonomy, abortion must be available. waiting until birth to have bodily autonomy is not ok if the mother chooses. Your words, not mine.Posted by: jasper at May 31, 2007 11:10 PM
It's hard to keep everthing straight when your defending the pro-death side. Quite often the pro-aborts turn themselves in circles.
But for liberals, Abortion is their holiest sacrement.Posted by: jasper at May 31, 2007 11:23 PM
@Jasper: That's not true, raising taxes is, get it straight.Posted by: Rae at May 31, 2007 11:38 PM
"No Cam bodily autonomy means the mother has control over what she can do with her body."
Oh silly me again.. I forgot you were the ultimate authority on the ins and outs of bodily autonomy. Did you happen to know that we're talking about bioethics?Posted by: Cameron at May 31, 2007 11:53 PM
Thats right, every campaign add I hear is "don't vote for the Democrats, they'll raise taxes"Posted by: JK at June 1, 2007 12:22 AM
@JK: Yup, those evil liberals and those evil tax raises. You know what? Minnesota needs to have their gas tax raised, it hasn't been raised in nearly 20 years. Do you know what our roads look like? Crap, that's what. And you know what our dear governor Pawlenty did? Vetoed legislation to raise the gas tax because he's against raising taxes. The man is a moron I tell you.Posted by: Rae at June 1, 2007 12:29 AM
"No Cam bodily autonomy means the mother has control over what she can do with her body."
Oh silly me again.. I forgot you were the ultimate authority on the ins and outs of bodily autonomy. Did you happen to know that we're talking about bioethics?
No, he's just repeating what you yourself have stated is a requirement for bodily autonomy, and you don't have a response to your own argument (besides put-downs).
I have never even heard of "body autonomy" until I came to this blog. It does sound like some sort of alien movie. Who on earth has ever heard of a fetal invasion??? It's laughable. Even friends of mine who have had abortions have never told me such things.LOL!!Posted by: Heather4life at June 1, 2007 8:16 AM
I know...it's just a very strange attempt to make women the "victim" of the unborn child.Posted by: Bethany at June 1, 2007 8:43 AM
It's also called self-determination, but this word is more generally and popularly applied to a country and it's right to act in its own best interest. Self-determination as bodily autonomy, is one of the five basic tenets of bioethics, and is derived from natural rights.
What I find not so surprising, is that you don't seem aware of any of the philosophical/ethical/legal nuances of this topic which you so ardently campaign for.
What's that all about? I think it's strong evidence that you are a sheep. I'd update your nick name if calling you sheep wasn't already so cliche.Posted by: Cameron at June 1, 2007 9:51 AM
poor Cameron, twisting himself in the wind, can't back up his own arguments. They just seem to always fall apart for him. He's so pre-occupied with showing us how clever and smart he his, he often forgets what topic we're talking about.Posted by: jasper at June 1, 2007 10:10 AM
Cameron, LOL. I didn't get that. Probably just as well. Did you guys hear that there is a new movie coming out? It's called BODY AUTONOMY THE TRUE STORY OF THE FETAL INVADERS. It's a sequel to THE INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS. LMAO!!Posted by: Heather4life at June 1, 2007 10:29 AM
Where is His Man when you need him? I love that post he puts up from time to time. The last part especially. This suits Cam to a T.Posted by: Heather4life at June 1, 2007 10:36 AM
I hear you. Kentucky's governor Ernie Fletcher is too busy taking care of his homeboys to worry about actually governing the state. And then for the election he ran all these adds about what a good job he was doing and how the state was flourishing and what a decent and honest man he was fighting the big bad corrupt liberals. He ended up winning the republican primary with 51% of the vote (what a mandate *eyeroll*). I'll be glad to see Steve Beshear crush him this fall.Posted by: JK at June 1, 2007 10:48 AM
Contradictory Cameron, you think you're so smart. Didn't you just say the other day that you were doing something to help African Americans? Ever bother to study up on abortionist Edward Allred? FYI, he hates blacks! He wants to abort them all.Study up on the things you so ardently campaign for. Part of helping African Americans would be helping to preserve their race....No?Posted by: Heather4life at June 1, 2007 10:48 AM
and heather, we cannot forget about the Pro-aborts, Cam's hero. The founder of PP:
"Birth control: to create a race of thoroughbreds."
"More children from the fit, less from the unfit—that is the chief aim of birth control."
"The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal.
We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population,
and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs
to any of their more rebellious members."
"Before eugenists and others who are laboring for racial betterment can succeed,
they must first clear the way for Birth Control. Like the advocates of Birth Control,
the eugenists, for instance, are seeking to assist the race toward the elimination of the unfit.
Both are seeking a single end but they lay emphasis upon different methods. …"
"Those least fit to carry on the race are increasing most rapidly. … Funds that should be
used to raise the standard of our civilization are diverted to maintenance of those who
should never have been born."
"Today, however, civilization has brought sympathy, pity, tenderness …. We
are now in a state where our charities, our compensation acts, our pensions, hospitals,
and even our drainage and sanitary equipment all tend to keep alive the sickly and the weak,
who are allowed to propagate and in turn produce a race of degenerates."
"It now remains for the United States government to set a sensible example to the
world by offering a bonus or a yearly pension to all obviously unfit parents who allow
themselves to be sterilized by harmless and scientific means."
"I visited hospitals in this city, and found them lacking in the simple and most ordinary
article of decency. No soap, no cod-liver oil …. This has given rise to skin trouble,
and the poor little waifs are a sad, miserable lot. It would be a great kindness to let them
die outright, I believe."
"Knowledge of birth control is essentially moral. Its general, though prudent, practice
must lead to a higher individuality and ultimately to a cleaner race..."
Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, was a guest speaker at a KKK rally in Silverlake, New Jersey.
White people also use birth controlPosted by: JK at June 1, 2007 11:15 AM
Hey everyone, I'm waiting to find out if I'm still pregnant, had a miscarriage, have an ectopic pregnancy, or had an incomplete miscarraige.
Prayers would be appreciated.Posted by: Lauren at June 1, 2007 11:18 AM
Sorry to here you are having problems, and wishing you the best.Posted by: Cameron at June 1, 2007 11:28 AM
Here goes Heather4Life:
Abortion is an affront to the creative nature of God, it negates God as Creator,
Abortion denies the power of God to right a wrong, it negates God as Redeemer,
Abortion makes that which is good, the birth of human life, into that which is evil, the death of human life, and then calls it good, the very definition of blasphemy,
Abortion negates the resurrection power of God as it takes flesh that is alive in it's earthly abode (the womb) and kills it, while God takes that flesh which is dead in it's earthly abode (the grave) and desires to make it alive,
Abortion's desire is to take that which was composed from the chaotic array of elemental molecules into a symphony of life infused with an eternal soul, and turn it back to the entropy of randomness, chaos, nothingness, uselessness.
Abortion is against all that is hopeful, all that requires faith for success; for it's solution; annihilation, it's goal; death, it's dream; breaking God's heart, it's vision, Satan's ultimate power.
Abortion is a counterfeit, for the clawprints of Satan are everywhere to be found in its performance;
Abortion disguises hate as love, bondage as freedom, choice as maturity, sin as righteousness, political correctness as wisdom,
Abortion pits men against women, mothers against their children, fathers against God,
Yes, abortion is Satan's feeble attempt at killing God Himself, for abortion is a metaphor for Satan; it is his coat of arms, his family crest, his logo, his brand, it belongs to him......for he laughs at its willing proponents as they craft their own self-destruction, mantled in self-deception.
Copyright 2007 by HisManPosted by: HisMan at June 1, 2007 11:41 AM
Lauren, you will be in my prayers!Posted by: SH at June 1, 2007 11:51 AM
Ok, sorry this is completely off topic, but I'm so frustrated right now.
My doctors office has closed for lunch and no one called with my test results. I know for a fact that Labcorp releases their results before the start of the business day. I understand that the office is busy, but I can not believe they are making me wait to find out the fate of my child.
How flippin hard is it to make a 1 miniute phone call to say Mrs. Pope, you're test results showed X, we need to see you in the office on Y.
His office is so bad about this. My last results weren't given for 3 days because the nurse left early.
I liked my doctor at first, but more and more it seems like he doesn't actually see me as a patient, just a baby making factory.
I went to him for Endo, yet he seems to only worry about the infertility aspect. Once I got pregnant, he was already preparing for the next pregnancy. Before we even knew the outcome of my tests, he was telling me about using Clomid *next* time.
Sorry this isn't coherent, I'm just really stressed.Posted by: Lauren at June 1, 2007 11:55 AM
Lauren, sorry to hear about your troubles, I hope everything turns out fine for you and your baby.
It is really a shame that your doctor's office is treating you this way, I mean, this is a really stressful situation you are going through and stringing you along is just about the worst thing they could do.Posted by: JK at June 1, 2007 12:02 PM
My doctor did that too me with the results of my cervical cancer. Called me and went around the bush about the results and basically wouldn't give me a definitive answer. Called back later that day to ask if I was still smoking and then called back at the end of the day to tell me to come into the office the next day to talk about the results. Talk about a pain in my arse..
I hope you get the results you want, I will think of you.Posted by: midnite678 at June 1, 2007 12:02 PM
My prayers are with you.
I hope everything is OK with you as well.Posted by: jasper at June 1, 2007 12:23 PM
Yes white people also use birth control, but how many would speak at a Klan rally?
My heart goes out to you and I wish you the best. This has to be torture. I think what you have told us is exactly what you should tell your doctor. As a consumer, would you tolerate such lack of consideration from any other service provider like a real estate agent or your beautician? My husband would be out of business if he treated his customers in this manner, and he's not dealing in life and death issues.
Again Lauren my very best to you. I hope you will make your displeasure known. Maybe your doctor and his staff just need to hear it straight from a patient before they will do anything to change.
Lauren, I have been in your shoes, but not with the doctor (they are a pain in the arse in general) however, it doesn't make it any easier for you to know that. I'm sorry you're going through this. When I had a miscarriage, my best friend was 8 months pregnant, I went to her appt. with her and had the doc. do an ultrasound. I'm praying all is well for you and no matter what happens, God can get you through it!Posted by: luvmy5kids at June 1, 2007 12:46 PM
Hey Lauren, good luck and all. I hope you get the outcome you want. I'll send good vibes your way. :)Posted by: HumanAbstract at June 1, 2007 12:51 PM
Speaking of Jayne Mansfield...she's buried in a cemetery one town over from me, where my mom grew up. :)
Heart-shaped tombstone and all. Very interesting.Posted by: Lyssie at June 1, 2007 1:08 PM
Good luck as well, Lauren. Hope everything turns out well for your pregnancy.Posted by: Lyssie at June 1, 2007 1:10 PM
His Man, thank you so much for your post. How many people do we have that this would apply to? Lauren, I am so very sorry you are being treated this way. There is nothing worse than worry. God WILL take care of everything. You are a good person, and you are in my prayers.Posted by: Heather4life at June 1, 2007 1:24 PM
Just because one woman is racist doesn't mean that everyone who works at Planned Parenthood is racist. And if Sanger really wanted more white people and to exterminate all black people she should have been refusing to give white people birth control and studying the Hitler-esque model of extermination, instead of allowing so much choice.
There are plenty of institutions and organizations who have had racist leadership in the past, but now aren't considered to be racist.
Take Bob Jones University for example. Bob Jones was a card carrying racist, and up until a few years ago it was against school rules for a student to date outside their race. But today Bob Jones University is considered a school where students go to get a Christian intensive education, not a school where naive white kids go to learn how many ways they are "more elite" than other races.
And nearly every university in the south was once racist.Posted by: JK at June 1, 2007 1:39 PM
I didn't say everyone who works at PP is racist, I was referring only to Margaret Sanger.Posted by: Mary at June 1, 2007 1:54 PM
And I wasirecting my comment to Cameron.Posted by: Heather4life at June 1, 2007 1:58 PM
oops meant directingPosted by: Heather4life at June 1, 2007 1:59 PM
Lauren, I am SO sorry, and I have been praying for you and your baby!
Hisman: "I mean when you are proposing a theory, don't you have to look at all possibilities and then either prove or disprove them one by one? If the existence of God is not disprovable, then you can't simply discount the possibility. At least you have to consider it to be an unknown."
I mean no disrespect, but you seem to miss the position of athiests. At least for me. I don't speak for others.
Do you "consider it to be an unknown" whether Zeus exists and whether he is holy? I don't think you do. You dismiss it out-of-hand without much thought or struggle. That is exactly how easy it is for me to dismiss your belief in the God you believe in. Exactly the same. You could no easier convince me to give any consideration in your belief in Jesus than I could convince you to worship Zeus.
Can you disprove the existence of Zeus as god? Of course not. But you don't consider it to be an open question worthy of being an "unknown."
Hope that helps.Posted by: Hal at June 1, 2007 3:19 PM
Still praying for you lauren.Posted by: luvmy5kids at June 1, 2007 5:02 PM
Jesus Christ is not a theory. He revealed Himself to us by taking the form of a man of His own will and volition.
I couldn't make you believe in God or Jesus for faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God. Also, God reveals Himself to those who are open to hearing and truly seeking Him.
Did Zeus ever appear as a man, heal the sick, make the blind see, feed 5000, raise the dead, die on a cross, resurrect and then appear to over 500 people?
Jesus did it and it's documented by both beleivers and non-believers. I believe it as to staking my whole life on it as well as billions of other people. It's simply foolish to dismiss.
Zeus can go choke on a lightning rod.Posted by: HisMan at June 1, 2007 7:29 PM
hey does anyone know where to find that video that was on a few days ago, it was a sarcastic view of abortion rights. Can't remember much about it, it was a fake news anchor...Posted by: luvmy5kids at June 1, 2007 10:41 PM
Hisman, mock Zeus at your peril:
Zeus was the youngest son of the Titans Cronus and Rhea. When he was born, his father Cronus intended to swallow him as he had all of Zeus's siblings: Poseidon, Hades, Hestia, Demeter and Hera. But Rhea hid the newborn in a cave on Mount Dicte in Crete.
When he had grown up, Zeus caused Cronus to vomit up his sisters and brothers, and these gods joined him in fighting to wrest control of the universe from the Titans and Cronus, their king. Having vanquished his father and the other Titans, Zeus imprisoned most of them in the underworld of Tartarus.
Then he and his brothers Poseidon and Hades divided up creation. Poseidon received the sea as his domain, Hades got the Underworld and Zeus took the sky. Zeus also was accorded supreme authority on earth and on Mount Olympus.
Posted by: Hal
at June 1, 2007 11:00 PM
Not exactly the same tricks Jesus used, but still pretty impressive.
luvmy5kids, is this it?Posted by: Jill Stanek at June 2, 2007 6:17 AM
Thank you everyone for your prayers.
My dissatisfaction with my doctor has grown to an out and out rage.
They close early on Friday, and I was NEVER called. Looks like I have to set around all weekend in limbo. I can't believe they just wouldn't call with importnant test results.
I am so frustrated.Posted by: Lauren at June 2, 2007 8:15 AM
Lauren, who could blame you? After this ordeal is over, can you change doctors?Posted by: Heather4life at June 2, 2007 8:19 AM
Lauren, that is so terrible....I can't believe you have to wait all weekend to hear the results. :( It is so difficult not knowing, and having to 2 more days is almost unbearable!
Oh yeah, I'm definitely changing doctors. I mean, I like my doctor, but the way he deals with test results is horrible.
It wouldn't be so bad if I were waiting to hear if my cholesterol was a bit high or something, but we're talking about a life or death test.
I'm just hoping this means that I don't have an ectopic pregnancy. I would imagine they would have contacted me if that were the case. Of course,they may have simply overlooked my results in which case I could actually be in danger.Posted by: Lauren at June 2, 2007 8:40 AM
I really hope and pray all will be well.
Thank you Bethany.Posted by: Lauren at June 2, 2007 8:51 AM
Lauren, I'm going to second what someone said about telling your doctor why you're switching. S/He can never improve if no one ever complains, and it is a VERY big problem to not notify patients of their test results. It could also be an issue with the nurses rather than the doctors, and this would give the doctor a chance to change things up so that it won't happen again.
Anyway, I wish you luck and happiness with the results!Posted by: HumanAbstract at June 2, 2007 11:59 AM
There's only one doctor, one nurse, and one receptionist at his practice.
I will definitely be letting them know how I feel.Posted by: Lauren at June 2, 2007 12:27 PM