"Antiabortion Effort in Europe, With U.S. Money, Widens Its Conservative Agenda"

[Bone_Vulture]

Thanks to POE news for this NYT article. (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/14/international/europe/14abortion.html)

In Croatia, the procedure was free 10 years ago but now costs more than the average monthly salary. Croatian schools now use a sex education program called Teen Star that promotes abstinence and teaches that birth control pills are dangerous and that condoms do not protect against disease.

[...]

Nowhere is the change more evident than here in Poland, where abortion was free - and freely accessible - under Communism. A relatively restrictive abortion law was passed in 1993 (it refers to the fetus as a "conceived child") and a strong social stigma has since emerged, along with an antiabortion stance among doctors' groups. The result: only 174 legal abortions were performed nationwide in 2004.

Makes me long for communism. File this under "what I think of Christians, or religion in general".

[Apoc]

Hooray for "conservatives". And by "conservatives" I mean blathering fools who wish to set society back a century or two. This all is happening because the education system in the U.S. is a failure. People who know better don't fucking vote for these cretins. It's just going to get worse, too, because these so-called "conservative" Christians are breeding like rabbits (http://www.totalobscurity.com/mind/news/2004/mom%20of%20the%20year.htm) while brainwashing (http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/08/14/justice.sunday.ap/index.html) those they didn't pop out of the "homemaker's" oven.

[-V-]

What can I say, that's the religious extrimism that some members of the Right and Conservatives seems to subscribe to. Makes me wonder why they don't rename themselves the Christian Theocratic Party. Against abortion, women's rights, and science.

[GoatChomper]

And who is forcing them to take the money? That's right.....nobody. Chalk up another win for not learning to live without a nanny-state.
This all is happening because the education system in the U.S. is a failure.
Too bad for your rant that academic performance was much greater when abortion was entirely unlawful.

[Bone_Vulture]

And who is forcing them to take the money? That's right.....nobody. Chalk up another win for not learning to live without a nanny-state.

He is not immoral who offers bribes, but who accepts them? :rolleyes:

Too bad for your rant that academic performance was much greater when abortion was entirely unlawful.

That's the weirdest parallel I've seen you draw yet: unlawful abortion = better school grades?

[Kak]

Anti-Abortion is always going to be a huge issue in Poland, it's like second to Rome in Catholosim-ness.

[Apoc]

Too bad for your rant that academic performance was much greater when abortion was entirely unlawful.

How is that? On what do you base that supposition? Students now recieve the same standardized tests that students in the 1950's did? That's an interesting standpoint to take there, Goat, since sexual education and basic human biology are kinda new in the public schooling system. People who know how STDs are transmitted, how the reproductive cycle works, and how birth control works don't vote for politicians who maintain that AIDS spreads through tears or that condoms are ineffective against pregnancy and disease. (The Republican Party's best weapon is ignorance, and how mighty a weapon it is. How else do you think they can get away with so much? People who are educated properly don't fucking vote for or support idiots like Tom Delay, Jerry Falwell, or Pat Robertson. You either have to suspend logical thought or have some ulterior motive to support such people. What ulterior motive? The advancement of your religious beliefs or monetary gain for your lifestyle.) When 45% of people in the U.S. think Intelligent Design (a.k.a. creationism) is the way the universe came into being, you have some serious problems on your hands. (Who wants to take bets on the person for whom that 45% voted in the last election?) Sure abstinence is the best way to avoid pregnancy or sexually transmitted diseases just like staying home is the best way to avoid dying in a plane crash. Are either of those realistic? Of course not. For a few people either one is viable, but for the overwhelming majority of people they simply don't work. The so-called "conservative Christians" can't have it both ways. Either you allow abortion and work against birth control or you allow birth control and work against abortion (I don't like either course, but then again I'm not an idiot). You want to talk about living in an ivory tower, Goat? Go talk to the "conservative Christians" about their asinine moralizing. Birth control works very well when used properly, period. The Christcons' logic is self-defeating, but nobody cares. Why? Because they're too stupid and/or ignorant to figure it out. They've all put blinders on or had blinders put on them by the likes of those mentioned earlier. And no, I have nothing against Christians or Christianity. I have everything against people who are malevolent, and these "conservative Christian" groups are just that.

[BlindSite]

Not all conservatives are anti abortion. Whilst I do not like using labels such as conservative and whatever, I do support abortion. I don't necessarily care if a government wants to offer money for people not to get one. They still have the choice at the end of the day.

[GoatChomper]

He is not immoral who offers bribes, but who accepts them?
You're bringing up a moot point of morality in an issue of choice. I thought you liberals were all about choice.....obviously, it has to be the "correct" one for your approval.
That's the weirdest parallel I've seen you draw yet: unlawful abortion = better school grades?
Off to the remedial language comprehension courses for you now.
Students now recieve the same standardized tests that students in the 1950's did?
Oh, you mean the same ones Texas recently used that failed so many schools when the special-education classes were included in the results?
.....sexual education and basic human biology are kinda new in the public schooling system.
Oh, how interesting.....claiming that medical students in the Fifties entered medical school without ever having had the benefit of a single basic highschool biology class. I know quite a few doctors who'd be interested in knowing that.
People who know how STDs are transmitted, how the reproductive cycle works, and how birth control works don't vote for politicians who maintain that AIDS spreads through tears or that condoms are ineffective against pregnancy and disease.
Feel free to provide evidence that this is an official stance of the Republican party, or go ahead and admit to lying now.
Are either of those realistic? Of course not.
Yeah, sure.....people constantly trip and fall onto genitals.
Birth control works very well when used properly, period.
And not engaging in procreative activity is even more effective.....that's so obvious, even somebody predisposed toward suppressing all mention of abstinence could comprehend it.

But go ahead, feel free to engage in the same self-defeating and alienating rhetoric of annointing oneself as intelligent and all dissenters as ignorant that's lost your bunch more and more of an electorate each time. Funny, how people who claim they're so intelligent can't seem to win one.

[Bone_Vulture]

You're bringing up a moot point of morality in an issue of choice. I thought you liberals were all about choice.....obviously, it has to be the "correct" one for your approval.

I've never been a huge fan of kickbacks and lobbying...

Off to the remedial language comprehension courses for you now.

NO U

Apoc claimed that due to the shitty public school system, increasingly uneducated people are more easily attracted to the black & white politics of neo-cons and christian extremists.

And then you stated that school grades were better when abortion was illegal. Now, what the hell is parallel between these two arguments? Or was it that you weren't even trying to counter Apoc's point, but rather blurted whatever sounded best?

Yeah, sure.....people constantly trip and fall onto genitals.

What a one-liner. :rolleyes:

And not engaging in procreative activity is even more effective.....that's so obvious, even somebody predisposed toward suppressing all mention of abstinence could comprehend it.

The problem is that the promoters of abstinence are not willing to offer the use of condoms and other prophylactics as an alternative, either. Instead we're bombarded with bullshit propaganda.

But go ahead, feel free to engage in the same self-defeating and alienating rhetoric of annointing oneself as intelligent and all dissenters as ignorant that's lost your bunch more and more of an electorate each time. Funny, how people who claim they're so intelligent can't seem to win one.

From a foreigner's point of view, what has lost the democrats presidential elections and seats in the government is their failure to respond to the constant smearing and berating by the right-wing extremists.

[Daywalker]

I think the tricky part is for those that want to tell kids they can't have sex, is to tell them about birth control without making it seem like, well we don't want you to, but if you wrap it up have fun.

[-V-]

I say they should treat children who would be of age to pertake in this activity as adults, not as 5yr old kids. I mean by the time your 15-16 you should already have a descent sense of morality developed on what's right to do and what's not. They should tell them what is out there, how the real world works, and then let them sort it out. Because no matter how hard you try to scare kids into not having sex (and turn the societal clock back 100 years to a time when they put skirts on pians and chairs, because they were afraid someone might get a hard-on from a piano-leg....FAGS!<ahem>) you will not succed. If they internalized the reason for not having sex they won't do it. However, if they have not internalized the reason for not having sex, and dont see any good reason to why not you might as well tell them about the contraceptives that exist and how well they work rather then lying to them.

[Super-Piglett]

Everyone who doesn't agree with me is stupid

Good argument.

[GoatChomper]

NO U
I'm not going to bother trying to explain what you fail to comprehend.....trying to teach a pig to whistle just wastes time and annoys the pig.
What a one-liner.
Your lack of rebuttal to fact is predictable.
The problem is that the promoters of abstinence are not willing to offer the use of condoms and other prophylactics as an alternative, either.
Get a wider brush.
From a foreigner's point of view, what has lost the democrats presidential elections and seats in the government is their failure to respond to the constant smearing and berating by the right-wing extremists.
Nobody is surprised you'd distill it to that.

[Hunter-Killer]

(...) promotes abstinence and teaches that birth control pills are dangerous and that condoms do not protect against disease.

So this is "OK"? Is that what you're saying? Teaching them lies and saying abortion is "teh evil!" is all fine and dandy. I'm not a liberal and I'm pro-abortion.

[Bone_Vulture]

I'm not going to bother trying to explain what you fail to comprehend.....trying to teach a pig to whistle just wastes time and annoys the pig.

Instead of admitting that your argument was a faulty one, you desperately cling on the high 'n mighty posture. :rolleyes:

Your lack of rebuttal to fact is predictable.

Your initial counter-argument wasn't directed towards me, so forming a rebuttal is someone else's job.

Get a wider brush.

Get a less cryptic comeback.

Nobody is surprised you'd distill it to that.

And nobody is surprised that you think that nobody is surprised.

[BlindSite]

This is how I view the issue of abortion as a sexually active 17 year old having grown up in a catholic school and a realativley non bias political family.

1. I see abortion as a method of contraception up until 27 weeks. This is when Medically the foetus becomes a child. I only support aboriton past this time if it is vital to the mother's health.

2. If education was in school systems about using protection when sexual education begins we'd have less problems with people not using it.

3. All forms of religous and political bias needs to be removed from this issue. Neither side of the argument (if you can use only two sides); Liberals and Conseratives are unified in their stances. Aside from this fact and I do not want to start a theological argument, religion is not an ethical compass, constitutionally most nations cannot be forced to follow one religion and there is no evidence of a soul.

4. Arguing irresponsibility is plain stupid. Condoms break and can fail. That is not irresponsible if it has a fault that it not detectable. Therfore there should be a system in place that is legally viable should my partner become pregnant thus my life be effectivley flushed down the toilet.

5. If you make abortion illeagal, you make it go underground and you end up with things like douching with drain-o. Keep it legal, keep it regulated and let the aborted fetus' go to stem cell or medical research for fucksake.

Honestly, who is harmed by the above?

[-V-]

<snippah>

Well said.

The real thing that irks me about all these anti-abortion anti-contraceptive movments is the fact that they use nothing but lies to back up their point. This is beyond detestable in my view. Anyone who shows you that much contempt by leing to your face like that, deserves only contempt and retribution in return.

[Hunter-Killer]

I just love those politicians who go around saying "Human life is sacrosanct!".. LOL :rolleyes:

[GrosPoisson]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_effect

Regardless of whether it's true or not, I always thought the Roe Effect was irony at its best.

[FaKToR]

That's sound likes a really shitty theory.

[GrosPoisson]

It does come from a very conservative source. The man who came up with it, James Taranto, writes for The Wall Street Journal as well as OpinionJournal.com.

[-V-]

All really comes down to if he can support that people are more opposed to Roe v. Wade now then they were say 10, or 20 years ago.

However, there is a fairly significant correlation between legalization of abortion and redution of crime. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legalized_abortion_and_crime_effect)

(original paper published on this topic: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=174508 may be viewd in full at the bottom of the page)

[BlindSite]

INteresting on the crime reductions.

[GoatChomper]

Instead of admitting that your argument was a faulty one, you desperately cling on the high 'n mighty posture.
You still labor under the mistaken notion that I was claiming a causality.....no, I'm not going to try teaching you to whistle.

[Moe_Rahn]

You still labor under the mistaken notion that I was claiming a causality.....no, I'm not going to try teaching you to whistle.
So what are you claiming, exactly? That liberals are wrong, period? Because that's basically all I've got out of this thread.

[kreket]

However, there is a fairly significant correlation between legalization of abortion and redution of crime. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legalized_abortion_and_crime_effect)

Oh, but that is only in relation with male fosters, silly! Girls shouldn't be aborted according to this. Now, what to do with that surplus of girls.. :p ;)


You reduse crime and increase the overall 'wealth' (pure money, formal and informal education, time and love(!)) to go around. It's harsh arguments, but it is still true. I don't much like the idea of abortions, but I guess I'm pro-choice.

With the abstinence preaching crowd one sort of get the impression that some of them either practice the use of preventatives within marriage (aka doing it for the pleasure of it) or really doesn't get any of it at all. It's not like conservatives reproduces like bunnies in the manner of Saudi princes. So what I don't get is how teaching on preventatives is opposing conservative views, when it is acceptable in marriage.

[Bone_Vulture]

You still labor under the mistaken notion that I was claiming a causality.....no, I'm not going to try teaching you to whistle.

I can whistle by myself just fine, thank you. Following Moe's cue, what were you trying to say then, exactly?

[Hunter-Killer]

I really don't see what's wrong with abortion?

It's HER child, HER body, why does it have to be THEM who get to decide on it? It's a choice, and being able to choose is a part of being free, and aren't the US all about freedom and liberty? :rolleyes: tee hee :D

[Bone_Vulture]

...and aren't the US all about freedom and liberty? :rolleyes: tee hee :D

You can consider yourself perfectly free as long as you don't have anything against the beliefs of religious extremists. Or more to the point, have nothing against religious extremists trying to enforce their own beliefs on you. http://bonevulture.homestead.com/files/oh.gif

[GoatChomper]

You can consider yourself perfectly free as long as you don't have anything against the beliefs of religious extremists.
Normally I'd respond by pointing out that I've never been personally threatened by any religious extremists, but trolls tend to be immune to common sense.

[BlindSite]

Tell me again why you're against abortion goat?

[Bone_Vulture]

Normally I'd respond by pointing out that I've never been personally threatened by any religious extremists, but trolls tend to be immune to common sense.

Of course you've never been threatened by religious extremists, as you agree with them completely. :rolleyes:

[GoatChomper]

Tell me again why you're against abortion goat?
Huh? Says who?
Of course you've never been threatened by religious extremists, as you agree with them completely.
I thought I made it clear that your whistling lessons are permanently cancelled.

[Bone_Vulture]

Huh? Says who?

GoatChomper: world's most ambiguous debater.

I thought I made it clear that your whistling lessons are permanently cancelled.

You'd make a perfect teammate for Bill O'Reilly - whenever his blowhard offensive would fail, you'd launch the verbal equivalent of octopus ink in the form of confusing sayings. "You're as left as Mike Tyson's boxing glove!" :rolleyes:

The point is that you really haven't answered anything, or made a solid stance in this thread. Whenever your glass-frail arguments are contested, you whisk them under the carpet and start pulling snide comments out of a top hat.

[GoatChomper]

GoatChomper: world's most ambiguous debater.
Still can't whistle.

[Moe_Rahn]

Still can't whistle.
After nearly an entire page, I still have no idea what your position on the issue at hand is, other than you don't have much of a liking for Finland, which really has nothing to do with abortion.

[GoatChomper]

You are mistaken.....I have neither like nor dislike for the nation.

[Moe_Rahn]

You are mistaken.....I have neither like nor dislike for the nation.
Despite the fact that you consistently and derisively refer to it as a "nanny-state"?

So what's your position on abortion, then? You know, the original topic of this thread.

[BlindSite]

Nanny state refers to the ideological position often presented, as in support of...

[pro kossu]

Nanny state refers to the ideological position often presented, as in support of...

I got interested so I turned to wikipedia:

The term nanny state, used especially in the United Kingdom, is a derogatory term for government intervention, especially in social issues. One of its earliest uses was in an article in The Spectator in the mid-1960s, by the Conservative MP Iain Macleod.

Policies such as bans on smoking in public places, high taxes on junk food, bans on recreational drug use, and anti-pornography laws are seen by their opponents as an example of a functioning nanny state.



From the way Goat has been using the term I would've guessed it was a derogatory term for a welfare state but it seems it is not so.

So basicly, a state intervening in abortion would be considered a nanny state.

[GrosPoisson]

Huh. Thanks for posting that, I've been interpreting and using that phrase in the wrong way entirely.

[GoatChomper]

Despite the fact that you consistently and derisively refer to it as a "nanny-state"?
Surely you know better than to equate a nation with its government.
From the way Goat has been using the term I would've guessed it was a derogatory term for a welfare state but it seems it is not so.
You stand corrected.....I use the term with fully derogatory connotation toward the system.

[Moe_Rahn]

Surely you know better than to equate a nation with its government.
All right, I'll admit poor phrasing on my part... you don't much care for its system of government.

[Bone_Vulture]

Let us track back a bit, shall we?

Too bad for your rant that academic performance was much greater when abortion was entirely unlawful.

Goat, darling: could you please tell us whether this sentence is an argument, or a nonsensical claim? Snide comebacks don't count as an answer.

[M123]

I think what Goatchomper is trying to say that abortion was made legal during the time that academic performance was higher and now that academic performance is down effort to make abortion illigal is up.

[BlindSite]

I wonder what the statistics on religion have to say about support one way or another.

[Violin]

I dont see whats so wrong with abortion to be honest. Sometimes, aborition is the best answer. What if the fetus/child er whatnot, has a disease that would cut its lifespan drastically short? Or something fatal, deformities, you name it. Something that would shorten its lifespan or make the child unacceptable in society? You would want that fetus to eventually come into the world as a child, and be looked down upon, or die very early?

And as to Goatchomper.... Why is it you give all these insults, or whatever you would like to call it, but I see you destroying other peoples posts and editing the crap out of them because "It is not appropriate for the firebox?" I havent really seen what side you stand on, it seems like you are just picking people apart.