She continues to be an example of many stereotypes as she continues her participation in this virtual society.

Dude, you make no sense.

Lauren’s insults remind me of my participation in a blog site filled with pro-aborts (They preferred the term pro-choice, but I didn’t care). They were mostly guys on the site, so instead of just calling me a whackjob, they would say sophomoric things like I had mental constipation. For some reason they really liked analogies that included a persons head and a persons rear. I still haven’t figured that out because most guys grow out of that by the time they are fifteen.

I argued with the people on the site for months and months. In the end I posted the fact that artificial contraceptives can actually cause abortions because they keep the fertilized egg from attaching to the uterine wall. Basically bringing to light all the pro-contraceptive folks may have unknowingly murdered their offspring. This didn’t go over very well, as the site owner shut down the site the very next day. I thought this to be quite profound because most liberal prefer denial to running away from their problems.

Because Lauren can’t use facts that sting, she has to use insults like whackjob. Although it is shallow, I must admit it is a cut above the insults that I have gotten used to. Lauren has proved herself to be slightly more mature than her male counterparts. She continues to be an example of many stereotypes as she continues her participation in this virtual society.

WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!? I thought 4/20 ended.

People with morals are not and never have been effective citizens. The thing that governments know best is this: People with high moral standards make trouble for the government. This is why the first thing Nazi’s and Communist do is get rid of priests. Our governments way of doing the same thing is to break down the morality of the family, then mold their minds to believe a new morality that it defines.

Sirens blaring.. conspiracy theorist on board.. How about this… maybe I dont think the way I do because the state says so..

Actually this type of questioning is not so ridiculous. It is a technique used by many educators to destroy the consciences of their students, making them practical sociopaths.

The idea is to take a normal child who knows the difference between right and wrong. They are taught this difference by their parents. The questioning is meant to separate the child from the morality learned in the home.

My favorite story like this was one where a priest and old lady a young couple are in a boat that is sinking. One of the people needs to get out to save the rest. It is up to you to save as many as possible. Who would you make leave the boat?

You would be forced to answer for a grade. If you give any static, they tell you there is no wrong answer and encourage you to go along with them.

Values clarification is an important element in the social constructionist weaponry. The end goal is to have a population that strictly adheres to norms perpetuated by the state. You can’t have that pesky morality getting in the way when you want an entire population to do your bidding.

“Could she have an abortion if she decided she did not want to carry someone else’s baby? Or should the biological mother have a say in the life or death of her own child?”

I will not respond to ridiculous hypotheticals that she has gotten out of pulp fiction. This isn’t even a real-life question. We don’t live in a vaccum people.

Similarly, would a surrogate mother have the right to abort the baby in her womb if decided she didn’t want to be pregnant anymore?

Contractually, no. And who would become a surrogate mother if they didnt want to carry a baby? Seriously. Dumb question.

Or what if her life was “at risk” because of the pregnancy?

Well then, yes. What do you think? No? Sounds good, let her die then.

Or what if the biological mother of the baby decided she didn’t want her baby anymore. Could she force the surrogate mother to get an abortion?

Who in their right mind would do this after seeking out a surrogate? Come on, until this is a real life case with real individuals this issue doesnt even deserve attention.

Is an embryo a separate human being?

No.
If not, who has rights to it?
The mother.

If yes, then should it be protected?
__Does not apply.

My question: Fire starts in a labratory. There’s a two-year-old and an embryo. You can only save one. Who do you save?

You want to pose ridiculous hypothetcials, so will I.

Thanks for providing the stats on Poland.

Lauren,

Shooting the messenger usually isn’t a good idea. Nonetheless, have it your way.

As mentioned in the referenced article in comment #5, the findings on maternal mortality LifeSite reported on were taken from data gathered by the United Nations Population Division.

It shouldn’t be too difficult to find the same information on the UN’s website.

Lauren,

I really have to wonder if you actually read Annie’s post, in which she poses ten — count ‘em, ten — questions.

First you bring up tangential points, then, when Phil calls you on it, you snidely reply that you see nothing in Annie’s post worth addressing.

Then, when I actually speak to your tangential points, you reply that you refuse to read the article I included.

I’m left scratching my head, trying to make sense of it all.

Nice note on Ireland… Here is one on Poland:

Poland started severely limiting abortion on January 7th 1993. Abortion supporters have all sorts of made up statistics that they use to justify abortion, like back alley abortions will increase. The REAL statistics are out and it turns out abortion supporters are dead wrong! A copy of the report can be found here http://www.hli.org.pl/en/wd/statement_2003.doc

The fun statistics are here:

1) All abortions happened in hospitals. There are / were no “back alley” abortions.
2) The rate of abortions dropped from 59,417 in 1990 to 174 in 2003.
3) Spontaneous marriages continued to decline despite the decrease in abortions.
4) The number of miscarriages had declined from 59K to 41K.
5) The number of women’s deaths due to pregnancy and childbirth went down from 70 in 1992 to 23 in 2003.
6) The number of sill births has continually dropped from 7.3 per 1000 births to 4.86 per 1000 births.
7) Infanticide and Abandonment with the result of death also dropped from 53/1 in 1991 to 25/0 in 2003.

The most important fact as stated on the second page, “It might be then stated that during the law’s functioning women have not provoked miscarriages with the aim of abortion. The opponents of the law were afraid of such phenomenon done on a massive scale.”

Joe

P.S. – I heart Poland.

For reasons that should be fairly obvious, I don’t know how many abortions were performed in the U. S. before it was legalized.

You don’t know how many abortions were performed in the U. S. before it was legalized.

No one knows how many abortions were performed in the U. S. before it was legalized.

Can’t we leave the tired old myth of dangerous back-alley abortion alone?

“Laws against abortion kill women.”

Try telling that to the Irish:

Source:LifeSiteNews.com
Date:23/02/06
Ireland, with Ban on Abortion, Still Safest Place in World to Have a Baby

One of the most commonly played assertions of the abortion movement has been that laws prohibiting abortion result in maternal deaths from “unsafe back-alley abortions.” Now data from the United Nations has shown that countries with laws protecting the life of the unborn also enjoy lower rates of maternal mortality than countries where abortion is legal.

The comparison of four countries in the developed world published by the United Nations Populations Division, shows that Russia, with one of the highest rates of abortion in the world, has a maternal mortality rate of 67 deaths for every 100,000 births. The United States, with almost no legal restrictions on abortion but better health care, has a rate of 17 deaths for every 100,000 births.

Ireland, however, where abortion is illegal and with health care comparable to the US, has the lowest rate of the four countries with only 5 deaths for every 100,000 births. In Poland, long under communist rule, the rate is 13 deaths for every 100,000 births.

The study is timely for pro-life countries like Poland and Ireland, as well as those in Latin America struggling under heavy pressure from the UN and European Union to legalise abortion. “The World Mortality Report: 2005″ lists infant and maternal mortality rates around the world and “is the first report of its kind” from the UN Population Division.