The W
Views: 97644829
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
24.7.07 1515
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Partial Birth Abortions Banned
This thread has 3 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next(1214 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (95 total)
AWArulz
Knackwurst
Level: 107

Posts: 512/3336
EXP: 13011349
For next: 80004

Since: 28.1.02
From: Louisville, KY

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
Y!:
#61 Posted on 7.11.03 0446.53
Reposted on: 7.11.10 0446.55
    Originally posted by DrDirt
    Many Protestants, not necessarily Protestant denominations, view many forms of birth control as types of abortion. In 1991, Wichita was the fcous of anti-abortion protest with George Tiller's clinic the target. Rrandall Terry and company were in the media everyday. They were adamant in their statements and many were against birth control period.

    While abstinence may be preferable, premarital sex not a good idea, and teens should never have sex, the reality is much different, was, is, and will be. We can make inroads in decreasing these situations but birth control of various kinds must be available.



1st and foremost, let me say that nothing Randall Terry and Operation Rescue does has anything to do with me. There is nothing in the Christian worldview that allows one to break a duly ordered law of the land in order to right a (perceived) moral wrong. The bible says over and over that governments are God's way of taking care of justice. I so disagree with Terry and his adherents. So do many right-thinking Christians.

Secondly I am up for any birth control that doesn't kill a conceived child. In other words, condoms would be fine with me, the pill and the patch (they do about the same thing), I would say, in their approved doses, is another way (because it prevents ovulation). And, as a note, I personally have had a vasectomy.

Large doses of the pill or RU-486 cause the womb to reject the already fertilized egg, which is killing a life. (again, back to the concept of the entire genetic structure being there, just not quite as big as you and I). So I am as against those methods as I am against the four major methods of abortion.

EXCEPT: When there is an issue that threatens the mother's life. And that doesn't include her "lifestyle"



(edited by AWArulz on 7.11.03 0548)
DrDirt
Banger
Level: 96

Posts: 108/2690
EXP: 8759910
For next: 228909

Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 1 day
#62 Posted on 7.11.03 0909.14
Reposted on: 7.11.10 0912.54
AWA, I apologize. I didn't intend to label you or any other pro-life advocate as being in the same camp as Terry. My point was that many on that side believe in no birth control outside of rhythm.

IMO, RU-486 should only be available to victims of rape, incest, or those who were practicising birth control that failed. Abortion should NOT be a lifestyle choice since in most cases the pregnancy was easily preventable.
Corajudo
Frankfurter
Level: 58

Posts: 187/810
EXP: 1507615
For next: 69940

Since: 7.11.02
From: Dallas, TX

Since last post: 15 days
Last activity: 2 days
#63 Posted on 7.11.03 0940.16
Reposted on: 7.11.10 0941.41
    Originally posted by DrDirt
    IMO, RU-486 should only be available to victims of rape, incest, or those who were practicising birth control that failed. Abortion should NOT be a lifestyle choice since in most cases the pregnancy was easily preventable.


I don't see how you would be able to only offer RU-486 to someone whose birth control failed. How would that be enforced? I can see with rape and incest because those can be proven medically. However, anyone could say 'my birth control failed' and there would be no way to (dis)prove it.

And, to clarify one pont about the Catholic Church--the Church forbids any unnatural (or barrier) form of birth control. So, you are correct in that they don't allow condoms (or the pill, for that matter), but I think it's crude and a bit of an oversimplification to list the rhythm method as the only 'acceptable' form of birth control (along with abstinence). Also, although this is the official stance of the Church, I'd be shocked if as many as 5-10% of Catholics actually followed that teaching.
ThreepMe
Morcilla
Level: 53

Posts: 331/641
EXP: 1093722
For next: 63404

Since: 15.2.02
From: Dallas

Since last post: 3610 days
Last activity: 3269 days
#64 Posted on 7.11.03 1038.38
Reposted on: 7.11.10 1040.00
My biggest dilemma with the whole abortion issues is:

What should we end up with?

An immoral mother who has had several abortions?

Or

A bunch of unloved, uncared for childern?

IMO, I think they should put a stipulation on abortions (for people who use it as a form of birth control). If you get, say 2 or 3, then you get your tubes tied (or what ever method is being used now).

Don't want kids? Then you don't get to have any.

I feel that there is a definate need for birth control. But I get almost sick when I hear the debate over it. Everyone thinks they know where to draw the line on what is and what is not acceptable.

Abortions deal with life. The sancity of life is a relative thing. But everyone wants a legal standard for something that everyone has a different opinon on. Everyone wants this issue sloved with words in a bill or law. And it gets ridiculous. There are fights over meaning of words such as "life," "conception" and "murder."

Or the ultimate irony, people killing each other over an argument about life.

I think the biggest problem is, we are looking at this issue the wrong way. And in the process are making things worse.

As of now, we have 2 stances on this. Pro-Life and Pro-Choice. Both sides have valid arguments for and against each other. That being said, neither is right and neither is wrong.

Does this fix anything? Nope.

So that means we should probably look in another direction to solve this.

Some say better education will work. But it's almost laughable when people in this country say "better education" considering the quality of our education system. (which only gets worse as we dump more and more poverished childern onto it)

Some say easier/more effective birth control is the answer. Well, the problem with that is, the people who need it most have the least amount of access to it (the poor, teens, the uneducated, etc)

I think we need to fix this at the base of the problem. But the flaw is that there is no way to keep people from reproducing. Personally, I can't wait until genetics gets to the point where we can give people a quick shot and make them sterile. Then if/when they actually want childern, they can get another shot that reverses the process. Viola, childern.

Hell, I would even say take it one step further. Give every child a shot (at birth, or whenever it would be safe to do so, maybe at puberty, who knows) that makes them sterile. That way there is no chance of teenage pregnancy (and let's face it, nothing is going to stop puberty from making teens have sex). And when you want to have kids, you take a test (similar to a driving test, just more intense) to prove that you are ready for a child. Then breed all you want.

Think of all the problems that would be solved if people only reproduced when they "wanted" to?

Welfare would almost be uneccessary.

WIC, gone.

Orpahns: no longer exist.

I even think it would help with the divorce rate in this country.

On a side note, I think the idea of wrapping this (or almost any) argument in the ideas of ANY religion only hinders any real progess to be made. This issue has enough variables in it already, the last thing it needs is something as fanatic as Religious Faith. We have a hard enough time trying to figure this out as humans. The last thing we need to try to figure this out as Chatholics, Protestants, Jews, Muslims, etc.

Just my 2 cents.
DrDirt
Banger
Level: 96

Posts: 112/2690
EXP: 8759910
For next: 228909

Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 1 day
#65 Posted on 7.11.03 1127.08
Reposted on: 7.11.10 1129.01
    Originally posted by Corajudo
      Originally posted by DrDirt
      IMO, RU-486 should only be available to victims of rape, incest, or those who were practicising birth control that failed. Abortion should NOT be a lifestyle choice since in most cases the pregnancy was easily preventable.


    I don't see how you would be able to only offer RU-486 to someone whose birth control failed. How would that be enforced? I can see with rape and incest because those can be proven medically. However, anyone could say 'my birth control failed' and there would be no way to (dis)prove it.

    And, to clarify one pont about the Catholic Church--the Church forbids any unnatural (or barrier) form of birth control. So, you are correct in that they don't allow condoms (or the pill, for that matter), but I think it's crude and a bit of an oversimplification to list the rhythm method as the only 'acceptable' form of birth control (along with abstinence). Also, although this is the official stance of the Church, I'd be shocked if as many as 5-10% of Catholics actually followed that teaching.


Another shade of gray. No you can't know for sure except by producing the perscription or sales receipt and that doesn't prove use.

And that is right. the church's stance is not necessarily that of their members. Remember Clinton is a Baptist. hard to tell by his moral conduct.

ThreepMe. As hard as it is, education is the key. Also preventing unwanted pregnancies is important enough to insure availabilty reagrdless of cost. And as much as wrapping this in religion is a sticky situation, moral beliefs are the crux of this argument and most people's moraltiy is a function of their religous beliefs.
AWArulz
Knackwurst
Level: 107

Posts: 513/3336
EXP: 13011349
For next: 80004

Since: 28.1.02
From: Louisville, KY

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
Y!:
#66 Posted on 7.11.03 1159.31
Reposted on: 7.11.10 1200.06
    Originally posted by ThreepMe
    My biggest dilemma with the whole abortion issues is:

    What should we end up with?
    An immoral mother who has had several abortions?
    A bunch of unloved, uncared for childern?

    IMO, I think they should put a stipulation on abortions (for people who use it as a form of birth control). If you get, say 2 or 3, then you get your tubes tied (or what ever method is being used now).


Yeah, but now we're back to playing the eugenics game, Threep - sterilization because you don't meet "our" standards of whatever.

Here's my question: Did people have lots of "unloved, uncared - for " children, in, say, the 1960s? My two doors down friends who were not catholic (Luthern, I bet, although I don't really know), had many, many brothers and sisters (I want to say 10 total kids) and all of their older b rothers and sisters had lotsa of kids, and so on. This was inner city Gary, Indiana. Did single mothers have kids out of marriage. Sure. But not in the numbers we have today. Did young guys like me get in a lot of girls' pants? Nope.

Why? You might say times were different, or the church had a lot of influence. I can tell you that as a young person, I never darkened a door (except on Easter, of course) of a church. But morals were different. It wasn't about STDs, although that was an issue. It was about pregnacy. You got a girl pregnant, you married her.

Today, you get a girl pregnant, you pay the deductable on the abortion and go on your way. Men are pigs. If more Dads would beat young men senseless for touching their daughters, we'd have a better world, I think.

Better to beat 'em senseless at 16 and let 'em live on, a little sorer and a little smarter than to reach in with a hoe and scrape 'em out in pieces at age 8 weeks. You don't recover from that.

Oh, yeah - unwanted, unloved? Relax the crazy laws on adoption and all 30 million of the kids who have been killed could be living now. And we might not have killed the one who has the cure for AIDs or Cancer or, even endlessly running toilets.

Madame Manga
Kolbasz
Level: 46

Posts: 273/480
EXP: 711111
For next: 668

Since: 16.1.02
From: Silicon Valley

Since last post: 85 days
Last activity: 14 hours
#67 Posted on 7.11.03 1217.41
Reposted on: 7.11.10 1227.52
    Originally posted by AWArulz
    Today, you get a girl pregnant, you pay the deductable on the abortion and go on your way. Men are pigs. If more Dads would beat young men senseless for touching their daughters, we'd have a better world, I think.


*clap*clap*clap*

Of course, this cuts both ways. The girls might have to start to consider their bodies and their sexuality as something more than recreational objects. They might even decide to wait for serious adult relationships or marriage. And in the modern day, we can't have that. Virginity is something to be shed as fast as possible--you wouldn't want to, like, pass up any opportunities that happen to fall along your way, for fear of being a dried-up prude or out of step with your friends. This is the ultimate logical extension of the sexual revolution--the freedom, nay, *obligation*, to 'express yourself' to the full physical extent possible, especially if it gets the male population more cheap ass.

:roll eyes:

MM
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 2438/4700
EXP: 21364319
For next: 472343

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1178 days
Last activity: 975 days
#68 Posted on 7.11.03 1226.35
Reposted on: 7.11.10 1229.04
    Originally posted by AWArulz
    Today, you get a girl pregnant, you pay the deductable on the abortion and go on your way. Men are pigs. If more Dads would beat young men senseless for touching their daughters, we'd have a better world, I think.
BRAVO! That's why I subscribed to the "Polishing Theory." If I have a daughter, I will be polishing a different firearm every time a male suitor comes calling. Call it a "warning"....
DrDirt
Banger
Level: 96

Posts: 115/2690
EXP: 8759910
For next: 228909

Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 1 day
#69 Posted on 7.11.03 1308.31
Reposted on: 7.11.10 1308.50
AWA, Madame, and Grimmis. The real point is two fold. One, fear is not a bad thing and fear of being shot or beaten or being ostracized can be pretty powerful in obtaining the correct behavior. Maybe not the best way, but a last gate to hold the horses in.

Two, getting knocked up, whether you are the knocker or the knockee should have the glamour taken out of it. We must make it clear that society frowns on this and you are less of a man or woman if you act irresponsibly. No school teachers throwing baby showers, etc. Along with that, if the man (boy) knew he was going to work now and almost all his pay would go to the kid or you go to jail and earn it there, it may not seem so appealing.

And Madame Manga, I agree, we must change the perception of sex as merely a recreational activity and work to place it in its proper context.

edit typos

(edited by DrDirt on 7.11.03 1310)
DMC
Liverwurst
Level: 69

Posts: 1108/1180
EXP: 2743084
For next: 126674

Since: 8.1.02
From: Modesto, CA

Since last post: 3384 days
Last activity: 3378 days
#70 Posted on 7.11.03 1852.23
Reposted on: 7.11.10 1855.01
Just to add here that, as far as I know, the birth control pill does not prevent conception necessarily. It prevents *implantation* of the conceptus in the womb, which is why many pro-lifers, both Protestant and Catholic, are against it. (Am I right on this?)

DMC
Corajudo
Frankfurter
Level: 58

Posts: 188/810
EXP: 1507615
For next: 69940

Since: 7.11.02
From: Dallas, TX

Since last post: 15 days
Last activity: 2 days
#71 Posted on 7.11.03 2123.28
Reposted on: 7.11.10 2126.56
    Originally posted by DMC
    Just to add here that, as far as I know, the birth control pill does not prevent conception necessarily. It prevents *implantation* of the conceptus in the womb, which is why many pro-lifers, both Protestant and Catholic, are against it. (Am I right on this?)

    DMC

My understanding is that the pill does two things--it works to suppress ovulation and it thins the lining of the uterus so that if ovulation occurs then the fertilized egg cannot be implanted (since, if memory serves, the pill has a 3-5% failure rate in preventing ovulation). Therefore, in cases where ovulation does occur and the egg is fertilized, then you could make the argument that the pill does cause an abortion.

Just as an FYI, and to put Christianity's attitude towards birth control in a better historical perspective, no Christian denomination allowed any type of birth control (except for abstinence, of course) until after 1930. In 1930, the Anglican Church (Episcopal Church in the U.S., at least for now) began to allow limited use, which lead to the other Protestant denominations following suit.
ThreepMe
Morcilla
Level: 53

Posts: 333/641
EXP: 1093722
For next: 63404

Since: 15.2.02
From: Dallas

Since last post: 3610 days
Last activity: 3269 days
#72 Posted on 7.11.03 2200.07
Reposted on: 7.11.10 2204.00
AWA:

"sterilization because you don't meet "our" standards of whatever."

I like to think of it as "fertilization because you DO meet our standards."

To answer the hypotethical 1960's question. Well...it doesn't apply anymore. It's 2003. More and more people are having childern that they do not want. Orphanages and Abortions are the highest they have ever been. Even with population increase, the ratio is getting worse and worse.

"Better to beat 'em senseless at 16 and let 'em live on, a little sorer and a little smarter than to reach in with a hoe and scrape 'em out in pieces at age 8 weeks. You don't recover from that."

I put that under the "better education" part of my last post. A beating is a good lesson. Too bad so many people frown on corporal (sp?) punishment.

But the reality is: we don't teach out kids the same way. A good ass whuppin is no longer tolerated.

The thing that sucks about this situation is that it changes every 20-30 years. And it getting to the point where it's changing every 15-20.


And I don't think the rules of adoption are going to get any more lax.

Funny how we have such strignent rules about adoption, but any yahoo is allowed to reproduce.

Rules about parenting one way, but not the other...
AWArulz
Knackwurst
Level: 107

Posts: 514/3336
EXP: 13011349
For next: 80004

Since: 28.1.02
From: Louisville, KY

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
Y!:
#73 Posted on 8.11.03 1244.21
Reposted on: 8.11.10 1245.37
    Originally posted by DMC
    Just to add here that, as far as I know, the birth control pill does not prevent conception necessarily. It prevents *implantation* of the conceptus in the womb, which is why many pro-lifers, both Protestant and Catholic, are against it. (Am I right on this?)

    DMC


In the recommended dosage, the pill and the patch supress ovulation. In heavy doses they prevent the fertilized egg from attaching in the womb. Like I said, I got no problem with the 1st. The second is a problem.

But, as an example, I'd be not in favor of being hooked on Oxicitin (okay, I am sure I don't have a clue on how to spell that...), but I wouldn't ban it because some people use it incorrectly. They're the ones that have to deal with that.

On the otherhand, why am I in favor of an absolute ban on partial birth abortions? They are barbaric, for one. If it is that bad for the Mom and/or the child, then a hyrostomy (I think I spelled that right)(similar to a ceasarean section) would be appropriate. The child might be saved. Not going to happen in a partial birth abortion.
MoeGates
Andouille
Level: 88

Posts: 1498/2093
EXP: 6481430
For next: 169260

Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 2 hours
Last activity: 2 hours
#74 Posted on 8.11.03 1620.38
Reposted on: 8.11.10 1620.39
    Originally posted by Grimis
      Originally posted by AWArulz
      Today, you get a girl pregnant, you pay the deductable on the abortion and go on your way. Men are pigs. If more Dads would beat young men senseless for touching their daughters, we'd have a better world, I think.
    BRAVO! That's why I subscribed to the "Polishing Theory." If I have a daughter, I will be polishing a different firearm every time a male suitor comes calling. Call it a "warning"....


Hey! We agree on something! I also am on the porch with my shotgun from the day she's born. Female suitors are OK though.
fuelinjected
Banger
Level: 97

Posts: 1695/2679
EXP: 9096552
For next: 220806

Since: 12.10.02
From: Canada

Since last post: 3171 days
Last activity: 3171 days
#75 Posted on 8.11.03 1755.14
Reposted on: 8.11.10 1756.31
How about raising your daughters to have self-respect and the right frame of mind to make these important decisions about what situations she puts herself in? Nah, it'd be much easier to try and scare off any boyfriends with a shotgun. Yeah, that's the solution, possibly scare off a good guy and deprieve your daughter of happiness.

    Originally posted by AWARulz
    It wasn't about STDs, although that was an issue. It was about pregnacy. You got a girl pregnant, you married her.


Great, so you both end up fucking miserable and take it out on the kid.
DrDirt
Banger
Level: 96

Posts: 121/2690
EXP: 8759910
For next: 228909

Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 1 day
#76 Posted on 8.11.03 2302.08
Reposted on: 8.11.10 2303.08
    Originally posted by fuelinjected
    How about raising your daughters to have self-respect and the right frame of mind to make these important decisions about what situations she puts herself in? Nah, it'd be much easier to try and scare off any boyfriends with a shotgun. Yeah, that's the solution, possibly scare off a good guy and deprieve your daughter of happiness.

      Originally posted by AWARulz
      It wasn't about STDs, although that was an issue. It was about pregnacy. You got a girl pregnant, you married her.


    Great, so you both end up fucking miserable and take it out on the kid.


Amen. What's worse than an unwed mother. Two people being married and miserable raising a child.

Your comment about self-respect is right on target. For both the son and daughter. Maybe a lot of these problems could be avoided if we parents picked the ball up and spent more time raising our children instead of letting the schools and after school programs do it. How about we as a society we make a conscious effort to spend more time with our kids period. How about at least knowing where they are and who they hang out with.
MoeGates
Andouille
Level: 88

Posts: 1499/2093
EXP: 6481430
For next: 169260

Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 2 hours
Last activity: 2 hours
#77 Posted on 8.11.03 2349.07
Reposted on: 8.11.10 2350.01
I fully agree. The time I spend with my daughter can be teaching her how to use her own shotgun for when she has daughters.

In all (or at least more) seriousness, I wholeheartedly agree with these sentiments. However -

a) no matter how hard you try, it sometimes takes several years to really benefit from good parenting. I credit my parents completely with the good place in my life I am now. That didn't stop me from being a little smuckey teenager, and dumb luck played a more-than-nominal part in getting me through to young-adulthood without permanent damage.

b) teenage boys are God's punishment for humanity's sins incarnate. Teaching your daughter self-respect, etc. might give her a good edge against them, it's true. But a Dad with shotgun on the porch is a sure thing. There are certain stupid mistakes that each teenager needs to make for themselves, and learn from. There are others that it's the parent's job to protect them from. Not educate them about, protect.
drjayphd
Scrapple
Moderator
Level: 115

Posts: 1645/3937
EXP: 16526932
For next: 284483

Since: 22.4.02
From: Long Island

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#78 Posted on 9.11.03 0004.21
Reposted on: 9.11.10 0004.24
See, Moe, here's the problem with that statement (namely, part B). That assumes that no matter how well you educate them as a parent, they will always make the worst possible decision. Part of raising them can be protection, of course, but in certain, specific, subtle ways. I mean, if you have to resort to sitting on the porch with a shotgun, doesn't that kind of mean you didn't do a very good job in the first place? DrDirt's methods seem to be a whole lot better for everyone involved... if you can pick out the bad seeds, then the gun's kinda unnecessary.

(Disclaimer: I have not, nor do I plan on having kids for quite a while. Although I'd like to think that when it comes to sex, I'm not a fuck-up there who'd father kids without being ready.)
Madame Manga
Kolbasz
Level: 46

Posts: 274/480
EXP: 711111
For next: 668

Since: 16.1.02
From: Silicon Valley

Since last post: 85 days
Last activity: 14 hours
#79 Posted on 9.11.03 1319.36
Reposted on: 9.11.10 1320.48
I have two boys, BTW. Neither of them is nearly old enough to get in trouble or put a girl into it--but they are both going to learn, as soon as they can absorb it, that sex is not merely an amusement or a 'rite of passage' but a responsibility. As it is one of the greatest pleasures in life, it is also one of its most serious elements.

IMO, any *man* worthy of the name will always carefully consider the possible result of spreading his sperm around and face up to it when it occurs. A *boy* can't do that--he can't support a female and a child, and therefore, to my way of thinking, he doesn't even have the RIGHT to risk starting a baby. So until you are willing and able to marry a particular woman, don't have intercourse with her, and don't hang out with girls who pressure you to sleep with them before YOU are ready. Masturbate, don't procreate.

I think this accords with both common sense and good morals. But let's see how successful I am in inculcating that message!

MM
DrDirt
Banger
Level: 96

Posts: 122/2690
EXP: 8759910
For next: 228909

Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 1 day
#80 Posted on 9.11.03 2214.13
Reposted on: 9.11.10 2214.35
    Originally posted by Madame Manga
    I have two boys, BTW. Neither of them is nearly old enough to get in trouble or put a girl into it--but they are both going to learn, as soon as they can absorb it, that sex is not merely an amusement or a 'rite of passage' but a responsibility. As it is one of the greatest pleasures in life, it is also one of its most serious elements.

    IMO, any *man* worthy of the name will always carefully consider the possible result of spreading his sperm around and face up to it when it occurs. A *boy* can't do that--he can't support a female and a child, and therefore, to my way of thinking, he doesn't even have the RIGHT to risk starting a baby. So until you are willing and able to marry a particular woman, don't have intercourse with her, and don't hang out with girls who pressure you to sleep with them before YOU are ready. Masturbate, don't procreate.

    I think this accords with both common sense and good morals. But let's see how successful I am in inculcating that message!

    MM


First to Moe. It does take several years, in fact at leat 18. The key is getting through to them by starting as soon as they have any real understanding of consequences. The years from birth to eight are key in this. It is a life long pattern of behavior that we must instill as parents. part of the problem is that we tolerate this behavior in boys because we expect it and accept it as normal. Are boys and girls wired differently? Definitely yes. But that is not an excuse for allowing boys a free rein.

Madame Manga. Could I phrase your comments in this way and you would agree? We are treating our teenage children as adults when they are not emotionally or intellectually ready or capable of being adults. We compound that with giving them a perverted sense of what adulthood is, i.e. screwing, drinking, driving. etc. Our children would benefit from our doing two things. One, giving them a well-defined set of rules and parameters to follow with very appropriate punishment if they don't. Two, replace the society's messed up view of adulthood with one that emphasizes responsibility, respect (including self-respect), compassion, a strong sense of identity, and a strong moral compass to determine right from wrong.
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 NextThread ahead: Jessica Lynch Laments Military Portrayal
Next thread: CNN Planted Questions for "Rock the Vote" Debate
Previous thread: New Political Parties?
(1214 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Partial Birth Abortions BannedRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.252 seconds.