Bush Appoints AntiAbortion Doc to Head Pregnancy Office

Phoenix32890 wrote:

LoneStarMadam wrote:
Phoenix32890 wrote:
The fact remains that teenagers DO have sex, and contraception is an efficient way to ensure that unwanted pregnancies are avoided, as well as STDs. As far as abortion, there are the religious, and the non-religious, who are on both sides of the issue. A youngster needs to understand the lawful options available to her, in case of an unwanted pregnancy, without coercion, and then let her make up her own mind.

It is up to parents to inculcate or not any religious slant that they may have on the subject, and not the government.[/b]

Isn't it a fact that thieves still rob but we try to teach them not to?
What age teenager are you talking about? 13? 18?

Any age. I have no problem with teaching abstinence to a 13 year old. I don't think that a youngster of that age has the emotional maturity to embark on a sexual relationship. But again, I don't think that is the job of the government. It is the job of the parents.[/b]

I completely agree that is the parents job to teach their kids about sex, however, if schools are going to teach about artificial contraception, then teaching them abstinance is appropriate as well.

0 Replies

Merry Andrew wrote:

LoneStarMaiden -- humblest apologies for getting your name wrong. Btw, who said I was a 'liberal'?

Bear -- I think you know me well enough by now to know I'd never risk insulting anyone of your species.

I posted an apology to you about my post. Embarrassed

0 Replies

LoneStarMadam- If abstinence, contraception, and abortion can be taught in schools as choices, in an informational way, without the teachers making value judgments, I would not object. The only problem that I have is that I don't think that many teachers would offer the information in a disinterested fashion.[/b]

0 Replies

Phoenix32890 wrote:

LoneStarMadam- If abstinence, contraception, and abortion can be taught in schools as choices, in an informational way, without the teachers making value judgments, I would not object. The only problem that I have is that I don't think that many teachers would offer the information in a disinterested fashion.[/b]

I do oppose that abstinence, contraception and abortion are choices.

Abstince means, you have no sex.
Contraception that you have sex, but don't a child.
Abortion doesn't look at the sex but on not having a child.

Such certainly, however, should be taught when 'sex' is the topic.

When I did so, I just taught the facts.
I spoke about my personal opinions - clearly marked as such - only when pupils asked for it.

0 Replies

Phoenix32890 wrote:

LoneStarMadam- If abstinence, contraception, and abortion can be taught in schools as choices, in an informational way, without the teachers making value judgments, I would not object. The only problem that I have is that I don't think that many teachers would offer the information in a disinterested fashion.[/b]

We have to trust the teachers to teach, not preach. I would hope that a teacher, much like a doctor, could & would examine each subject in a professional way. We can't police all classrooms all the time. If one form of contraception is taught, all should be taught, in a clinical form, of course.

0 Replies

Abstenence is a sure method of not getting pregnant, artificial contraceptives ia a maybe no pregnancy. Anybody that is old enough to have sex should be old enough to accept the consequences.

0 Replies

LoneStarMadam wrote:

Abstenence is a sure method of not getting pregnant,....

Right. As is not meeting any people at all.

0 Replies

Are you for real!?

Anybody old enough to have sex is old enough to accept the consquences?

It is just too damn bad, I guess, that the consequences are a person.

I know full grown married people that have a hard time with the "consequence" on caring for a whole other person that they wanted and planned for.

Tough luck, little Consequence.

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

LoneStarMadam wrote:
Abstenence is a sure method of not getting pregnant,....

Right. As is not meeting any people at all.

Maybe it's my age, I come from a different era I suppose. Sex, willy nilly, in my day was very much discouraged. Of course there were those that slept around but they weren't taken home to meet mama. I am sorry that people now-a-days seem to believe it's ok to use a girls/womans body for a little gratification & then say, hey, contraceptives or abortion is the answer. How about self control, you know, it isn't just the silver table settings & clothing that seperate us from the animals....or it wasn't at one time.

0 Replies

boomerang wrote:

Are you for real!?

Anybody old enough to have sex is old enough to accept the consquences?

It is just too damn bad, I guess, that the consequences are a person.

I know full grown married people that have a hard time with the "consequence" on caring for a whole other person that they wanted and planned for.

Tough luck, little Consequence.

& your point is? Are you defending irresponsibility?

0 Replies

No. I'm defending contraception.

0 Replies

LoneStarMadam wrote:

Isn't it a fact that thieves still rob but we try to teach them not to?

Yes, but we haven't yet invented a condom for theft. If we had a 10 cent device that lets thieves steal to their hearts' delight without anyone getting stolen from, Phoenix and I would be all for using it. Wouldn't you?

0 Replies

The thing is, if those who are getting preggers willy nilly would have just been aborted in ther first place there wouldn't be a problem.

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

LoneStarMadam wrote:
Isn't it a fact that thieves still rob but we try to teach them not to?

Yes, but we haven't yet invented a condom for theft. If we had a 10 cent device that lets thieves steal to their hearts' delight without anyone getting stolen from, Phoenix and I would be all for using it. Wouldn't you?

So we just quit teaching thieves not to steal? Just throw in the towel?

0 Replies

dyslexia wrote:

The thing is, if those who are getting preggers willy nilly would have just been aborted in ther first place there wouldn't be a problem.

Of course, kill the babies, it's their fault.

0 Replies

What do you suggest be done with children born to parents who conceived with happy family stars in their eyes but still find themselves unable to adequately care for their child?

Accepting consequences and being a good parent are two entirely different things.

0 Replies

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

bush is an arrogant jerk off. The fact that he's a republican president has nothing to do with it. He'd be an arrogant jerk off no mater his political views, occupation, or religious beliefs.

If he were an ordinary guy who hung out in bars he would probably spend a great deal of time getting the **** kicked out of him by the same rednecks who now embrace him, simply because he's an arrogant jerk off.

Who did you vote for in 2004? If I were a betting man, I'd bet big that it was John Kerry. You lose your right forever to call anyone arrogant once you've voted for Kerry. Have you any concept of how arrogant John Kerry is? Bush is about the humblest person alive next to Mr. Wife Is A Billionare.

0 Replies

boomerang wrote:

What do you suggest be done with children born to parents who conceived with happy family stars in their eyes but still find themselves unable to adequately care for their child?

Accepting consequences and being a good parent are two entirely different things.

Adoption? In Tx we even have places that unwanted babies can be dropped off literally on the doorstep, no questions asked.
What would you suggest?
Accepting responsibility is what it's called.

0 Replies

Re: Bush Appoints AntiAbortion Doc to Head Pregnancy Office

Phoenix32890 wrote:

Quote:
The Bush administration, to the consternation of its critics, has picked the medical director of an organization that opposes premarital sex, contraception and abortion to lead the office that oversees federally funded teen pregnancy, family planning and abstinence programs.

The appointment of Eric Keroack, a Marblehead, Mass. obstetrician and gynecologist, to oversee the federal Office of Population Affairs and its $283 million annual budget has angered family-planning advocates.

Keroack currently is medical director of A Woman's Concern, a Christian nonprofit. The Dorchester, Mass.-based organization runs six centers in the state that offer free pregnancy testing, ultrasounds and counseling. It also works to "help women escape the temptation and violence of abortion," according to its statement of faith. And it opposes contraception, saying its use increases out-of-wedlock pregnancy and abortion rates.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/11/18/D8LFELHG0.html

So he's done it again. I am so disgusted, that I really don't know WHAT to say. I am counting the days to when he can retire to his ranch. [/b]

Well Phoenix, I just look at it this way; If the electorate of this country preferred a president who would appoint someone who would just make sure that as many abortions as possible will occur, someone who would not even mention abstinence or adoption as options, the country would have voted a liberal democrat into office.

That didn't happen. The country twice elected a decent, conservative to the WH precisely so that judgeships, and posts such as the one you complained about, are occupied by decent people, and not garbage from the far left.

0 Replies

LoneStarMadam wrote:

boomerang wrote:
What do you suggest be done with children born to parents who conceived with happy family stars in their eyes but still find themselves unable to adequately care for their child?

Accepting consequences and being a good parent are two entirely different things.

Adoption? In Tx we even have places that unwanted babies can be dropped off literally on the doorstep, no questions asked.
What would you suggest?
Accepting responsibility is what it's called.

When you are talking about accepting responsibility, you will likely run into great opposition from liberals.

Why else are the furthest left fringe trying to eliminate the posting of the ten commandments, the complete withdrawal of any religious symbols (except perhaps the religion of Islam)? It's because the ten commandments call for self responsibility and mention rules.

0 Replies

Bush Appoints AntiAbortion Doc to Head Pregnancy Office

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know