|
|
||
|
Navigation User login Who's online There are currently 7 users and 36 guests online.
Online users
Support OlyBlog OlyBlog is run by volunteers who care about Olympia. If you like what we're doing, make a donation: OlyBlog is powered by:
Who's new
 |
Submitted by Rick on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 6:23am.
The Beaver and the Plan B saga, continued at Pandagon Well, bad news, everyone. Biting Beaver, who was brave enough to tell us all her horror story about trying to obtain emergency contraception in rural Ohio but only being able to get it basically as the window of opportunity was closing, has discovered that she didn’t take the EC in enough time and she is indeed pregnant. She’s announced that she’s going to get an abortion, which, as Violet Socks points out, will probably just escalate the abusive comments and emails Beaver’s getting from men who are just so damn concerned about the sanctity of life that they have to tell her she’s a whore and a cunt and she deserves to die. » | |
Oh no!
Submitted by jlw on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 8:14am.OMFG!!
Submitted by bubbaz (not verified) on Tue, 10/10/2006 - 3:06am.This is terrible!
Mass ignorance is brutal thing to witness...
Women shouldnt even need to *HEAR* any of this bullshit noise coming from these absolutely clueless men.
I represent
Submitted by enpen on Tue, 10/10/2006 - 8:11am."If you are a dreamer, come in. If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, a hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer. If you're a pretender, come sit by my fire, for we have some flax-golden tales to spin. Come in! Come in!"
You can call me Mark!
Submitted by bubbaz (not verified) on Tue, 10/10/2006 - 9:59am.I *tote* a penis too..
Sincerely,
Roe Vs Wade is *Wholly Constitutional*
Submitted by bubbaz (not verified) on Tue, 10/10/2006 - 10:51am.Sisters (as you already know...),
--> Roe Vs Wade is *Wholly Constitutional* <---
I can affer a --> *truly libertarian <--- argument backing up that statement.
Sisters,
Please put these fools down!
They are trying to be cute about this and its pissing me off!!
Im right here if anyone wants to check it....
(im the short guy...ya cant miss him.....and relish taking this public)
Sincerely,
That's really too bad, I
Submitted by Norm on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 11:01am."It's also too bad that
Submitted by maria on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 11:07am."It's also too bad that she's been targetted, but if she was willing to post her story online, she kind of opened the door to being a target. "
What a great example of blaming the victim. Nice job!
It's not my job to place
Submitted by Norm on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 11:51am.It's not my job to place blame, I was simply stating a fact. Once your actions come out and you are in the public eye you've opened that door, everyone knows that. Ask Drew and his copwatching, ask mark foley. I'm not saying she deserves, I'm simply saying that's the way the world works, and she probably knew at the time she'd be targetted.....sad, but a truth none the less.
so, if you got attacked and
Submitted by Mike on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 7:46pm.Have you read what some of these freaks are saying to her?
Submitted by jlw on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 8:55pm."If I ever met you I'd fucking kill you like you murdered your baby, fucking whore
Die you fucking slut
Why don't you just kill yourself now. People like you don't deserve to live
Stupid whore. You spread your legs and now you want to murder a baby. I hope you get raped and murdered. Maybe then you'll feel what that innocent life felt"
Sorry about the language, but I'm quoting, and I think the language is significant, because it gives you a sense of the weird rage that is directed at a woman simply because she had sex and used contraception. Where is that rage coming from? Isn't it weird?
Some people who are extreme
Submitted by Norm on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 10:37pm.Different situation. She was
Submitted by Norm on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 10:35pm.I am sceptical
Submitted by OlyDowntowner on Tue, 10/10/2006 - 12:00am.I don't buy it, Norm. You
Submitted by Mike on Tue, 10/10/2006 - 6:28am.Actually, I have to stick up
Submitted by Rob Richards on Tue, 10/10/2006 - 8:00am.um, I was wearing levi's
Submitted by Norm on Tue, 10/10/2006 - 9:12am.Hard time of year for me.
Submitted by Mike on Tue, 10/10/2006 - 12:51pm.Harry Truman stood up to give a speech one time and a person in the crowd shouted: "Give em Hell, Harry." Harry responded, "you know, I never did give them Hell, I just told them the truth and they thought it was Hell."
this sucks
Submitted by enpen on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 11:17am.It's really important that stories like hers be told
Submitted by jlw on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 11:28am.I understand what you are
Submitted by Norm on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 11:58am.Pro-life, anti-dignity
Submitted by DrewHendricks on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 12:23pm.When someone tells a woman that she cannot end a pregnancy, that the life in her womb is more important to society than her own choices about when to carry a pregnancy - what to do with her own body - I have to ask whether that person is more concerned with life than with dignity. Seems to me that the same people turn around and support warfare, capitalism, and all kinds of behaviors that end life - sometimes even the death penalty imposed by the state. But even in absolute consistency, this attitude discards what is most important about being a human; individual consciousness is our gift so that we can make our own choices.
Nowhere is this more clear than when men and women scream "whore" at a woman who has decided differently than they would think that they would. Of course, for men we can never know what we would do in a similar situation. But so many have a ready answer for others' choices.
As for the public / nonpublic choice, it is true that one steps onto that stage (mostly) out of choice. But the use of a pseudonym indicates that she did not want to be abused for her choice. And even though I withstand a certain amount of guff from people for what I do, I never grant anyone my dignity. If I felt I was ill-used, it would come back to the user, not to my choice whether to be "out."
That's exactly my point
Submitted by Norm on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 1:14pm.That's exactly my point Drew. It's not nice, and maybe she hoped it would not come back to her, but the internet is an amazing thing and sometimes very unforgiving. I'm not saying it's her fault, and I think it's wrong that she is targetted, but this is exactly why medical information has SO many laws put up in front of it. I don't want people to know my medical history, or what I do at a pharmacy, so I don't mention it on the net. I would be even more scarce if I were a woman. It's not right, but it is what it is. Heck I feel sorry for hollywood folks who end up in the news, I wouldn't want my life put onto the cover of a magazine.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here...
Submitted by Rick on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 1:33pm....and guess that the woman who posted the information was not a dummy and knew that the internet is not a safe place. Further, I'm guessing that it was more important to her to find the most efficient means for spreading word about her experience. So, the point really isn't about her obviously voluntary disclosures, but rather about the sickness expressed by those who responded to her, and what that says about the present cultural moment. "It is what it is" doesn't make it ok, even if it is predictable.
When you think of the long and gloomy history of man, you will find more hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than have ever been committed in the name of rebellion. -C.P. Snow
Hmm, am I just sounding like
Submitted by Norm on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 1:52pm.Hmm, am I just sounding like a big ol' butt today or what? I know I said "it is what it is" but the beginning of that sentence was "It's not right,". Please, PLEASE don't think that I am in any way condoning peoples behavior for being mean to this woman, that is most definitely not my point and I don't want it to be taken that way. I think it's incredibly mean, and cruel.
I'm really in a good mood today and am feeling quite jovial, I don't know why I'm giving the impression that I'm trying to be a butt.
My impression...
Submitted by Rick on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 2:01pm....is that sometimes the sheepdog is a little too vigilant about pointing out every single alternative universe -- missing the emotional truth that is embedded in the message that you're commenting on. The overall effect is that your communication sometimes comes off as negative. TFI also has a tendency to do this -- usually by focusing on a very narrow part of what someones says, without addressing the overall impact of what is being expressed.
Glad to hear you're in such a good mood. I'm trapped in a small room with no windows at present, but I've heard that it is a gorgeous day outside.
When you think of the long and gloomy history of man, you will find more hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than have ever been committed in the name of rebellion. -C.P. Snow
What Rick said
Submitted by Sarah on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 2:23pm.But we differ in our current experiences of the day: he's trapped without windows, I'm free but sneezing and coughing. One thing is consistent, the day is gorgeous.
Additional nodding from me
Submitted by jlw on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 2:58pm.Again, it's not the fault of
Submitted by The Fire Inside on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 4:13pm.Again, it's not the fault of the business for a lack of planning.
It's like going camping, forgetting the food, finding out that getting groceries in eastern Washington is next to impossible when you're in the middle of nowhere, and blaming the nearby gas station for not having the groceries you should have got when you were on the western side of the mountains.
what?
Submitted by enpen on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 4:27pm."If you are a dreamer, come in. If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, a hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer. If you're a pretender, come sit by my fire, for we have some flax-golden tales to spin. Come in! Come in!"
Be a Boy Scout: Always Come Prepared
Submitted by The Fire Inside on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 4:32pm.It's like going camping = It's like having sex
forgetting the food = not keeping Plan B at your house
finding out that getting groceries in eastern Washington is next to impossible when you're in the middle of nowhere = unable to get Plan B because not everywhere keeps it in stock/is out of stock
and blaming the nearby gas station for not having the groceries you should have got when you were on the western side of the mountains = blaming Ralph's, Bayview, etc. because of your own poor planning
When I was younger, I used to wait until the last minute to get something done. For instance, let's say I had a baseball game. I would be getting ready for the game 30 minutes before I needed to leave and, sure enough, would probably forget something. My dad used to say, Laaaast minute. Always waiting until the laaaaast minute. Anyway, that's the voice I hear over and over in my head when I read the Plan B stories.
Congratulations on a great analogy!
Submitted by jlw on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 7:26pm.For instance, when a woman
Submitted by The Fire Inside on Tue, 10/10/2006 - 1:17am.For instance, when a woman needs Plan B because of rape or condom breakage, her need is not based on a failure of planning.
I agree with you on the rape stance. A condom failing? I'd have to disagree. Most people should have enough sense to know that a condom is far from the only necessary step.
Second, you ignore the fact that not stocking a drug that is only used by women is blatantly discriminatory.
So now a store can't make a decision for their business because it's only used by one sex?
What if that gas station poured some diesel fuel into a Dinty Moore stew can, sealed it up and sold it as food?
Actually, that would be false advertising. They advertised one product but clearly sold another. Simply not offering a product is completely different but, in this case, the government is the trump card. It's actually pretty useless trying to defend Ralph's because, in the end, the state is going to come in, slap them around, and tell them what they can and can't do.
How about answering Janet's
Submitted by Rob Richards on Tue, 10/10/2006 - 8:03am.What if the only store in
Submitted by The Fire Inside on Tue, 10/10/2006 - 9:11am.What if the only store in the region sold food to men, but refused to sell it to women?
It would be discrimination but, as I've said before, it should be up to a business to determine whether they want to discriminate based on (fill in the blank).
What if that gas station poured some diesel fuel into a Dinty Moore stew can, sealed it up and sold it as food?
That would be false advertising. The product being advertised (Dinty Moore stew) is completely different than what is in the can (diesel fuel). I would support anyone who was the victim of false advertising.
That would be illegal, dangerous and greedy, wouldn't it?
Yes, false advertising is illegal, dangerous, and greedy.
Those were the only questions I saw in the post.
It's interesting that your typical libertarian position falters
Submitted by jlw on Tue, 10/10/2006 - 10:08am.I resent unreasonable
Submitted by The Fire Inside on Tue, 10/10/2006 - 12:31pm.I resent unreasonable government intrusion. For instance, food preparation. I think the government should be involved with ensuring food is prepared as advertised. It's simply unreasonable to expect each person to know their food is prepared as advertised short of getting up from their chair and watching the entire process.
In the case of prescription medication, the only regulating the government should be involved with is ensuring each product does what it is advertised to do. How would you know if a placebo is being sold rather than Plan B?
So I think a minimum amount of involvement is the most reasonable.
but not when a pharmacy is violating pharmacy code?
I must not have made it clear enough, so I'll state it explicitly: I don't think the Pharmacy Board should have the power to force a pharmacy to carry a product. Forcing a business to carry a product goes far beyond the minimal amount of involvement.
I think forcing a woman to drive 100 miles to get...
Submitted by jlw on Tue, 10/10/2006 - 1:48pm.So, you are going to join
Submitted by Mike on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 7:54pm.Mike, you are just being an
Submitted by Norm on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 10:38pm.To be quite honest, I don't
Submitted by The Fire Inside on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 11:48pm.To be quite honest, I don't care. It's pretty civil in here but if someone wants to call me out, that's fine. In lecture if you make a comment that doesn't make sense, your peers will call you out and be pretty harsh in their ridicule.
One of my first college lectures had the professor saying something like this: There are stupid ideas. Not every idea or thought is on par with each other, so don't expect people to coddle you.
A group that you can count
Submitted by The Fire Inside on Tue, 10/10/2006 - 12:40am.A group that you can count on to do it's planning and have all the supplies when and where they need them? Boy, are you in for a rude awakening.
In the military I believe it's called adapting to the situation. Having played competitive sports all of my life, the military won't be any different. You simply need to adjust to changing situations and make what you have work.
I doubt I'll complain much. Coming from a long military tradition, there's not too much that I haven't already heard about that the military is going to give (both the very positive and the very negative). Now I only need to experience it.
For instance, during the initial invasion of Iraq my cousin (the older brother to my cousin currently deployed) said that water supplies were extremely low. Rather than complain, he and others went outside the standard operating proceedure in order to obtain water. We have a family friend who was in Vietnam and he recounted for me the difficulty with flashlights (as they usually didn't work). He just said you did what you could and moved on.
I haven't been paying attention to Norm's conversation, but I caught the part about him wearing a Caterpillar shirt to a peace protest. To be quite honest, I wouldn't have put a ton of thought into it, either. Then again, there's nothing that really offends me. Life is too short to get worked up over small things.
You won't have anything to
Submitted by Rob Richards on Tue, 10/10/2006 - 8:15am.Maybe I'm just being a jerk, but some of your comments about your expectations seem incredibly naive. Now, I realize you're young (early 20's?) and you idolize the people in your family that served, but I think you should not go in expecting anything, especially how you will react. I've seen some pretty "tough" people crack and some pretty "weak" people thrive under the pressures of operations. There's no way to reasonably assume how you are going to react until you're there, and I'm sorry, but it is NOTHING like playing sports, sports is a game with no real consequences as opposed to the very real life or death situations in the miltary. You make a mistake and people can die. You would be well served to do away with any fantasies you may have about the military before you ship out.
You're correct. There's no
Submitted by The Fire Inside on Tue, 10/10/2006 - 9:17am.You're correct. There's no way to predict how one will act in a pressure situation until one has been there.
I won't be an officer. A long story short, I can get more money from the military (and have more freedom in deciding on an MOS) by enlisting versus the C/O route. Plus I won't be locked in for nearly as long (only going to do a three year stint initially and take it from there). Yes, I do plan on being in the intelligence field (probably as an Intelligence Analyst), but I have looked at being a Calvary Scout (one of the more dangerous jobs right now).
With the exception of the consequences, sports and armed conflict are exactly the same. The running, jumping, hitting your target, working as one unit, etc. are all similar. In essence, the basic concepts are the same.
The difference, of course, is the winning and losing. When you lose in war, more than likely, you will lose your life (and/or the lives of your fellow soldiers). When you win in war, more than likely, you took a lot of life.
The difference IS the
Submitted by Rob Richards on Tue, 10/10/2006 - 12:42pm.Link to the Biting Beaver's Blog
Submitted by jlw on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 3:11pm.Ok, I have a life threatening bleed from my lip
Submitted by OlyCop on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 9:25am.First, let me say, the crap this lady is taking from the jerks in cyberspace is uncalled for and wrong. But like Norm said, you have to expect it. Just like posting on Olyblog, :) been there. And I'm buckled up for another round.
The thing that is driving me nuts is the statement(s) about blaming the victim. I guess I need to know how you mean victim. Is it a victim of the creeps on the internet giving her a hard time, ok. But if you consider her a victim about her plan b experiance, I say B.S.
The blame sits squarely in her and her partner's lap. They didn't plan, and used a very unreliable form of contraception. In this day and age, there is no excuse for not knowing what a risk it is to rely on just a condom. So they should have used other birth control, or if the condom is their sole method of choice, then have plan b available. It is common knowledge that plan b is hard to come by. So plan ahead.
This issue of not taking responsibility for your own decisions and behavior is rampant in our society now days. And it's on both sides of the political spectrum. It just drives me crazy.
"The strongest reason to retain the right to keep and bear arms is to protect against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson.
Can you back up your statement...
Submitted by jlw on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 9:33am.For me, one condom
Submitted by Norm on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 10:17am.Janet B
Submitted by OlyCop on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 10:59am.Below from wikipedia.
15% typical failure rate of condoms
2-8% typical failure rate of oral contraceptives
.8% typical failure rate of IUD
I couldn't find failure rates on the diaphram, but I would think it would be less than condoms.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IUD
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oral_contraceptive
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condom
"The strongest reason to retain the right to keep and bear arms is to protect against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson.
This website has a really
Submitted by OperaGirl on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 11:22am.This website has a really neat "summary chart" of all the different birth control options. Chart
"As I bit into the nectarine, it had a crisp juiciness about it that was very pleasur
Thanks OG! I find it
Submitted by Norm on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 11:48am.Haha! That's classic.
Submitted by The Fire Inside on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 12:12pm.Haha! That's classic.
And yes, they do need to come out with a male pill. I know a lot of men who don't trust any female who isn't on The Pill (combined with their condom use).
Here ya go
Submitted by Norm on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 1:03pm.I found it interesting
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3543478/
You guys should definitely demand this!
Submitted by jlw on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 7:05pm.I found information on the diaphragm
Submitted by jlw on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 1:58pm.According to this site, the rate of failure for the diaphragm is 17%, and for cervical caps, 17% or higher. The FDA lists the failure rate for male condoms as 11%.
The Biting Beaver cannot use the pill. She has stated that in her blog, prior to the current furor. Actually, many women have trouble using the pill; it can cause something called breakthrough bleeding, which is no fun, and can ultimately lead to anemia. Personally, I would like to be able to use the IUD because of its very low failure rate. I have had an IUD inserted three times, and all three times, my uterus expelled it before a week had passed. So I use a diaphragm. The diaphragm has a higher failure rate than condoms. Am I irresponsible?
I want to add that I am in a
Submitted by OperaGirl on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 3:28pm.I want to add that I am in a similar situation where I can't/won't use the pill as I already have an issue with my heart and am also prone to anemia. There down sides to the IUD's for me as well. Just so people know it's a common thing that women can react badly to the bc options out there. I would hardly think of myself as irresponsible though.
"As I bit into the nectarine, it had a crisp juiciness about it that was very pleasur
As a man who has "issues"
Submitted by Norm on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 5:14pm.I haven't turned up any good statistics and don't have much time
Submitted by jlw on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 6:42pm.This is NOT a question of who's to blame
Submitted by Rick on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 12:07pm.It IS a question of whether we think it is in the interest of society in general to make sure that there are as few unwanted pregnancies as possible. This whole debated boils down to those who think that there is greater benefit in letting people like "Ralph" decide this issue, or whether we should have a rational, consistent policy that everyone can count on. I choose the later, and I hope that others would too, because it is the most just solution, and entails the least amount of pain, suffering, and trauma over all. And isn't that really more in line with christian thought than the judgmental, self-important, and ungenerous actions of Stormans?
When you think of the long and gloomy history of man, you will find more hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than have ever been committed in the name of rebellion. -C.P. Snow
Well............
Submitted by OlyCop on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 12:49pm.I think this has a business componet to it, a religious componet to it, and a responsibility componet to it.
Storman's believes it conflicts with his beliefs. Ok, he should be allowed to make his own business choices. Just like Barnes & Noble can decide not to stock the Anarchist Cookbook. Or Safeway not to stock Playboy. How about Pharmacies not stocking low volume drugs that typically go out of expiration prior to sale due to their low demand in that area, thus saving on cost of operation?
There is evidence that Plan B will kill a fertillized egg. That is the rub for Christians, Muslims and Jews.
I believe everyone needs to be more responsible about their reproductive freedom. It's just too easy to kill a child in the womb now. With all the contraceptive choices out there, and even free to many who can't afford them, or are under 18, there is no excuse not to be responsible and plan.
Some here were upset by the use of self-defense at the Westlake Mall recently where a man died. But yet many here are ok with abortion, even late term where clearly it's a human being, not "just some tissue". Which is worse, kill the innocent, or kill to defend yourself and others?
If abortion isn't about self-importance, or being ungenerous, what is?
I know, Plan B isn't the same as abortion, but even in this family we are talking about, they are going to choose to kill rather than go full term and adopt out.
Ok Rick, Clinton is a hot spot for you, abortion and 2nd amendment are mine.
"The strongest reason to retain the right to keep and bear arms is to protect against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson.
Where's THAT evidence?
Submitted by jlw on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 1:27pm.I hear that it's a hot button...
Submitted by Rick on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 1:50pm.But given what you've said, you should be the biggest advocate for Plan B. It would prevent unwanted pregnancies that might result in abortions, wouldn't it? Nobody wants more abortions.
And what gives Stormans the right to place his own personal religious choice over the greater good of society? If he wants to pray all night and day, more power to him, but if he impacts the community in an obviously negative manner, that's a different story.
When you think of the long and gloomy history of man, you will find more hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than have ever been committed in the name of rebellion. -C.P. Snow
Rick
Submitted by OlyCop on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 2:23pm.Yes Rick, I would be 100% in favor of Plan B if it ALWAYS did it's thing prior to conception.
I believe Christians should not impose their beliefs on all of society. But, within their span of control, I think it is their right. It's his business, he gets to call the shots. If he loses business because of that decision it's his pain to deal with.
One of very few exceptions to the above rule would be abortion, because the one affected by the decision is completely innocent, dependant, and vulnerable. They pay the price fully with no vote on the decision.
"The strongest reason to retain the right to keep and bear arms is to protect against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson.
Ahem.
Submitted by jlw on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 3:10pm.FDA: Questions and Answers
Submitted by The Fire Inside on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 3:26pm.FDA: Questions and Answers on Plan B:
I haven't the slightest idea if any of this means Plan B "kills a fertilized egg." It says it will "prevent a fertilized egg from attaching to the womb," but I don't know if that's the same.
From everything I've read
Submitted by OperaGirl on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 3:33pm.From everything I've read (fda and other articles), it seems like they aren't even 100% sure that it causes a fertilized egg to not implant. I would much rather a woman use Plan B safely and easily rather than wait 8 weeks or whatever and then have to go through an abortion.
"As I bit into the nectarine, it had a crisp juiciness about it that was very pleasur
MAY not will, not kill
Submitted by jlw on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 3:56pm.Of course, it helps the anti-choice extremist cause if they can convince people that taking emergency contraception is somehow equivalent to killing a child. I have to congratulate them on their clever manipulation of the media, and their success in misleading the public about emergency birth control, despite the lack of any evidence to back up their claims.
Bad choice of words
Submitted by OlyCop on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 3:51pm.But, it is effectively the same thing. Plan B, if it doesn't stop pregnancy pre-fertilization, it prevents implantation, which is tantamount to killing the blastocyst/embryo, a human being. If Plan B only worked pre-fertilization, I would be fine with it.
TFI did the dirty work for me, so Janet, provide proof Plan B doesn't interfere with the egg after conception.
"The strongest reason to retain the right to keep and bear arms is to protect against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson.
See above
Submitted by jlw on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 4:05pm.oh la...
Submitted by enpen on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 4:11pm.How is a blastocyst/embryo a "human being"? What is your definition of "human"?
How can a man, who has no inkling of the physical toll pregnancy takes on the body, have any right to even speak on this matter?
How is potential more valuable than actuality?
How does forcing a woman to go to term with a pregnancy so that it can enter the adoption market have any legs as an argument when at the end of 2004 there were 114,000 children in the American foster care system awaiting adoption?
Get your ideals off of my daughter. If you don't want to be a part of an abortion, then don't. But quit trying to live other people's lives for them. It's cruel and inhumane.
"If you are a dreamer, come in. If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, a hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer. If you're a pretender, come sit by my fire, for we have some flax-golden tales to spin. Come in! Come in!"
So by your ideals, women
Submitted by Norm on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 4:20pm.the memory hasn't developed
Submitted by enpen on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 4:24pm."If you are a dreamer, come in. If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, a hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer. If you're a pretender, come sit by my fire, for we have some flax-golden tales to spin. Come in! Come in!"
I'll drop the circumcision
Submitted by Norm on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 4:44pm.I'll drop the circumcision thing, my whole point is this comment: "Get your ideals off of my daughter. " That is essentially a conversation block. You are sounding as if you seek to silence someone because they are the wrong gender. You don't seem like this kind of person enpen. I think, that until Rick puts a rule in that says, "No men are allowed to weigh in on female issues on this blog." men should be allowed to express their views here openly. No guilt trips involved.
yeah
Submitted by enpen on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 5:36pm.You're right, this is too extreme for me. My intent here is that I hold personal freedoms in high regard. I don't think a man's opinion about a woman's experience (which can only be an ignorant one, by definition) should in any way shape or form impede a woman from exercising her personal liberties. By attempting to control a woman's reproductive rights we are continuing a paternal tradition of infantalizing our culture's women that I find wrong and destructive to the long term health of a society.
"If you are a dreamer, come in. If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, a hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer. If you're a pretender, come sit by my fire, for we have some flax-golden tales to spin. Come in! Come in!"
not to mention
Submitted by enpen on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 4:28pm.As far as adult circumcision is concerned, yes, I believe women should have no choice in their adult son's circumcision.
"If you are a dreamer, come in. If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, a hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer. If you're a pretender, come sit by my fire, for we have some flax-golden tales to spin. Come in! Come in!"
I'm sure every boy out there
Submitted by Norm on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 4:33pm.I am not sure about your
Submitted by OperaGirl on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 4:38pm.I am not sure about your analogy but being anti circumsision myself (choosing to do it in adult life is not an issue with me) I just wanted to tell you that you are opening up another can of worms with that one! I might just blog about the issue so not to hijack this thread!
"As I bit into the nectarine, it had a crisp juiciness about it that was very pleasur
My analogy is skewed, but my
Submitted by Norm on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 5:12pm.circumcision
Submitted by enpen on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 5:40pm."If you are a dreamer, come in. If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, a hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer. If you're a pretender, come sit by my fire, for we have some flax-golden tales to spin. Come in! Come in!"
A newborn? Can't survive
Submitted by The Fire Inside on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 4:51pm.A newborn? Can't survive on its own for even a second.
Is the ability to survive without assistance an indication of whether or not one is to be classified as a person?
words words words
Submitted by enpen on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 5:45pm."If you are a dreamer, come in. If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, a hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer. If you're a pretender, come sit by my fire, for we have some flax-golden tales to spin. Come in! Come in!"
Woman have the right to a safe medical procedure
Submitted by bubbaz (not verified) on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 4:37pm.Enpen
Submitted by OlyCop on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 4:34pm.Your points are the crux of this argument. I believe a human begins at conception. I guess you need to ask yourself when your daughter became a human.
This issue is polarized just like the 2nd amendment issue is. And we won't settle it here. The bottom line is, abortion (I say murder) is legal. So really, Plan B is just another way to carry that out. Chemicals early, vacuum later, pick your method of death/torture.
Cruel and inhumane, and late term abortions aren't?
"The strongest reason to retain the right to keep and bear arms is to protect against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson.
late term abortions
Submitted by enpen on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 5:49pm."If you are a dreamer, come in. If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, a hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer. If you're a pretender, come sit by my fire, for we have some flax-golden tales to spin. Come in! Come in!"
Oh, and society has
Submitted by Norm on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 4:36pm.not equating items
Submitted by enpen on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 4:51pm."If you are a dreamer, come in. If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, a hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer. If you're a pretender, come sit by my fire, for we have some flax-golden tales to spin. Come in! Come in!"
True, but in this country
Submitted by Norm on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 4:54pm.again
Submitted by enpen on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 5:19pm.As far as your other point, what is does not mean what is correct. Was it right that free wealthy white men got to decide whether or not it was legal for other white men to have black slaves? What was right was free white men standing up for the rights of other human beings. As it is right now to stand up for the right of other human beings. A fetus is as human as my arm. I would hope, should I decide to cut off my arm, that people wouldn't suddenly take to the streets for my arm's right to be attached to my torso.
"If you are a dreamer, come in. If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, a hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer. If you're a pretender, come sit by my fire, for we have some flax-golden tales to spin. Come in! Come in!"
Nothing Wrong With Being a....
Submitted by bubbaz (not verified) on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 6:02pm.TFI didn't do any dirty work for you
Submitted by jlw on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 6:47pm.Suppose
Submitted by OlyCop on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 4:43pm.Enpen, suppose I punched the mother of your child at say 10 weeks, causing her to miscarry. I'm sure you wouldn't want me prosecuted for that, cuz that child wasn't human yet.
"The strongest reason to retain the right to keep and bear arms is to protect against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson.
that's assault, brother
Submitted by enpen on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 4:53pm."If you are a dreamer, come in. If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, a hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer. If you're a pretender, come sit by my fire, for we have some flax-golden tales to spin. Come in! Come in!"
If this happend to my wife,
Submitted by Norm on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 5:10pm.Assault yes
Submitted by OlyCop on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 5:36pm.But only on the mother of your daughter, right?
So a fetus, say at 6 months, it can live exterior of the womb with medical assistance, it's a human out of the womb, but not in it?
"The strongest reason to retain the right to keep and bear arms is to protect against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson.
right
Submitted by enpen on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 5:57pm.The rest here is pretty slippery slope stuff. Can and will are two very different things. But the definition remains, in the womb not a baby, out of the womb a baby.
"If you are a dreamer, come in. If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, a hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer. If you're a pretender, come sit by my fire, for we have some flax-golden tales to spin. Come in! Come in!"
Two "people" from Mexico
Submitted by bubbaz (not verified) on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 5:57pm.The have sex like rabbits for three weeks..
The woman becomes pregnant ---->concieves<------ (in Texas..)
The harvest is over, so the couple goes back to Mexico...
9 months later the child is born (in Mexico...)
Question: Is this child a U.S citizen?
but your daughter did
Submitted by Norm on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 6:08pm.eh?
Submitted by enpen on Fri, 10/13/2006 - 12:52am.There are also people that would tell me to F off if I told them that the earth is billions of years old and wasn't created in 7 days...what their religious doctrine has to do with truth, you'll have to explain to me.
"If you are a dreamer, come in. If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, a hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer. If you're a pretender, come sit by my fire, for we have some flax-golden tales to spin. Come in! Come in!"
I'm not sure if it was Enpen
Submitted by The Fire Inside on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 4:54pm.I'm not sure if it was Enpen or not, but when I raised this same question someone on here responded that you shouldn't be prosecuted for anything more than simple assualt (or whatever it would be if the mother wasn't pregnant).
But it is the simple truth. If a mother is pregnant and the fetus is not classified as a person during an elected proceedure (abortion), the fetus can't all of a sudden be defined as a person in the event of an assault or even murder.
So, legally speaking, I should be able to go out and punch pregnant women in the stomach and receive no more of a penalty than if I were to go out and punch men in the stomach.
I agree
Submitted by OlyCop on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 5:39pm.This is the stance the Pro-Choice extremists should take, but they want a double standard.
"The strongest reason to retain the right to keep and bear arms is to protect against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson.
The fetus is not a "Person"
Submitted by bubbaz (not verified) on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 5:43pm.The mother is.
word
Submitted by enpen on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 6:07pm.We need to concentrate on the rights of those currently alive.
"If you are a dreamer, come in. If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, a hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer. If you're a pretender, come sit by my fire, for we have some flax-golden tales to spin. Come in! Come in!"
Hey Enpen...
Submitted by bubbaz (not verified) on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 6:12pm.Check it out:
Two "people" from Mexico *illegally* cross the border into Texas.....
The have sex like rabbits for three weeks..
The woman becomes pregnant ---->*concieves<------ (in Texas..)
The harvest is over, so the couple goes back to Mexico...
9 months later the child is born (in Mexico...)
Question: Is this child a U.S citizen?
The implications are just staggering!
Can you back that up?
Submitted by jlw on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 6:53pm.the tendentious nature of
Submitted by The Fire Inside on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 6:58pm.the tendentious nature of this argument and have avoided engaging in it.
Why avoid engaging in it, though? It's pretty clear cut. If it's not a person in one instance (an abortion), it can't be a person in another instance (punching a pregnant woman in the stomach).
ignorance
Submitted by enpen on Fri, 10/13/2006 - 1:11am."If you are a dreamer, come in. If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, a hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer. If you're a pretender, come sit by my fire, for we have some flax-golden tales to spin. Come in! Come in!"
Not yet
Submitted by OlyCop on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 7:30pm.I haven't made any statements yet in a vacuum of evidence. You said earlier, "may doesn't mean it affects the fertilized egg", but I say "may doesn't mean it doesn't affect a fertilized egg". May is may, they don't know. Since I disagree with murdering of all human beings, but especially the most innocent, children, I choose to error on the side of protection of the child. You on the other hand choose the exact opposite.
As far as the double standard, it seems pretty clear. It's not uncommon that pro-choice extremists (and the wholesale murder of children is extreme), believe mommy can choose whether the child lives or dies, but no one else can, including the daddy. It's a child in the womb when mommy wants it, but it's just some tissue when mommy doesn't. Can't have it both ways. And don't give the crap about it being the "woman's body". It is a separate living entity, the mommy is just the incubator.
"The strongest reason to retain the right to keep and bear arms is to protect against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson.
We can all look back to the previous page...
Submitted by OlyDowntowner on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 7:58pm.As for pregnant women who are assaulted, I think it's deplorable, but I believe that existing statutes that address assault against women are sufficient to cover this sort of incident, if properly enforced.
Oops, that above post is from me
Submitted by jlw on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 11:44pm.Nope.
Submitted by Rick on Fri, 10/13/2006 - 6:16am.Sorry. I can change authorship only on posts, not comments.
When you think of the long and gloomy history of man, you will find more hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than have ever been committed in the name of rebellion. -C.P. Snow
woah
Submitted by enpen on Fri, 10/13/2006 - 1:03am.Agh, OlyCop! This is precisely the doctrine of misogynistic paternalism that has been hammered down our throats. The pregnant woman is FAR more than "just the incubator". The pregnant woman goes through extreme physiological changes that you and I can never fully appreciate or comprehend. Women are literally preyed upon by the developing fetus.
If something inside of you were eating you alive, do you really not believe you should have a say over whether or not you continue to sacrifice your body?
"If you are a dreamer, come in. If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, a hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer. If you're a pretender, come sit by my fire, for we have some flax-golden tales to spin. Come in! Come in!"
At least you are consistant
Submitted by OlyCop on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 6:24pm."The strongest reason to retain the right to keep and bear arms is to protect against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson.
"Person" refered to in US Constitution
Submitted by bubbaz (not verified) on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 6:47pm."Gun" isnt ;-*
The "Convenient Conservative" block I see
Submitted by bubbaz (not verified) on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 6:55pm."Arms," however, is.
Submitted by The Fire Inside on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 7:00pm.Totally Irrelevent....
Submitted by bubbaz (not verified) on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 7:03pm.No more crap diversions fire.... ------> *bring it <----------
PS: Roe V Wade Best thing GOP ever did!
Submitted by bubbaz (not verified) on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 7:06pm.You said "gun" is not
Submitted by The Fire Inside on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 7:08pm.You said "gun" is not referred to in the Constitution. I stated that "Arms" is in the Constitution.
Unless you're going to demonstrate that "Arms" does not refer to "firearms," it's completely relevent.
Now, if you want to debate exact language or word usage in the Constitution, here's three for you to find: right to privacy.
Diversion....
Submitted by bubbaz (not verified) on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 7:12pm.I dont need to demonstrate anything...
Roe V Wade is wholly Constitutional...
Now prove me wrong
Amendment IVThe right of the
Submitted by The Fire Inside on Fri, 10/13/2006 - 8:11am.Amendment IV
It's an inferred right. While the courts have interpreted the Fourth Amendment to mean there is a "right to privacy," there is nothing "wholly constitutional" about it. It's difficult defending "rights" that don't exist on paper.
We do need to protect the
Submitted by The Fire Inside on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 6:55pm.We do need to protect the rights "of the living."
Which is why men shouldn't be held financially liable if a woman takes a pregnancy to term against his wishes.
If you're really about the choice being up to the woman, she should be forced to deal with the consequences of both having an abortion (against the wishes of the male) and carrying a pregnancy to term (against the wishes of the male).
Are you a virgin?
Submitted by OlyDowntowner on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 7:43pm.that was just one long not
Submitted by Norm on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 9:21pm.One at a time
Submitted by The Fire Inside on Fri, 10/13/2006 - 8:22am.Are you a virgin?
Nope.
Do you still live with your parents?
No, I don't. In fact, judging by your handle, I've made it further from Olympia than you have.
Have you ever tried to talk to a guy into wearing a condom when he didn't want to?
Fortunately, I haven't been in bed with another male. Here's my question: If he doesn't want to wear it, why are you having sex?
and now you want to weasel out of your financial responsibility for the children you create
Weasel out? No, I'm not trying to "weasel out." I'm simply stating that the double standard in defending the "rights" is absolutely ridiculous. Basically what the people on this board are advocating is that once men get done "blowing their load," their involvement in the process are over. Over until it comes time to collect a paycheck. Then there is no shame in bringing the male back into the fold.
Men need to be responsible, too.
You want men to be responsible? Let them be a part of the process, rather than this It's my body and I'll do whatever I want, regardless of the wishes of the male. If that's the attitude you're going to take about your body, that's the attitude I'm going to take about my money.
I think maybe you hate women deep down.
Thank you Dr. Phil. Should I start weeping and confessing now or when we're sitting on the couch apart from each other?
TFI
Submitted by OlyCop on Fri, 10/13/2006 - 8:32am.Perfect response. :)
"The strongest reason to retain the right to keep and bear arms is to protect against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson.
rife with problems
Submitted by enpen on Fri, 10/13/2006 - 10:25am.If a woman is morally opposed to having an abortion, then it's her right to bear the fetus to term. Just like if the woman doesn't want the developing parasite in her to continue to feed off of her body, she should have the right to terminate the pregnancy. It is a man's responsibility to discuss the consequences of sex with his partner prior to sex. If the woman is opposed to abortion, then he should act in accordance with his beliefs. If the woman is opposed to seeing a pregnancy to labor, then he should act in accordance with his beliefs. The fallacy in your argument is in assuming that the man shouldn't be held responsible for his actions upon another autonomous individual. You're asking women to be held responsible for a choice a man makes (unless he's raped, sex is a choice).
"You want men to be responsible? Let them be a part of the process..."
Maybe I missed this lesson, but where in the books is putting a penis inside of a vagina not considered "part of the process"?
Your arguments are recycled arguments in favor of continued male dominance over the female body. Their assumptions are incredibly sexist.
"If you are a dreamer, come in. If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, a hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer. If you're a pretender, come sit by my fire, for we have some flax-golden tales to spin. Come in! Come in!"
It is a man's responsibility
Submitted by The Fire Inside on Fri, 10/13/2006 - 10:46am.It is a man's responsibility to discuss the consequences of sex with his partner prior to sex.
I'm getting closer and closer to advocating that sex carry with it a contractual obligation in order to ensure that the female is on birth control (in order to prevent any false claims), hold the party responsible for having an abortion accountable to their earlier statements (e.g. a woman changes her mind regarding abortion during the pregnancy) and so forth.
Maybe I missed this lesson, but where in the books is putting a penis inside of a vagina not considered "part of the process"?
Like I said earlier, evidently once we're finished ejaculating we're done with our part. And if we're done with our part, we're done with our part, physically and financially.