Time To Make A Difference

[Iggy]

'Um, what is the man doing in all of this. He is part and parcel of the pleasure Traveler? why hasn't he had himself fixed? Yep, just like one does to pets, if you are a responsible pet owner that is, you take your pets in and have them neutered and spayed.

Thus if the man is participating in all of this pleasure business, then let him take himself to the Dr and get himself fixed.

For that matter, the women you are talking about should go and get themselves sterilized also. If all they wish to do is have pleasure and not have babies, it would be infinitely easier, cheaper and way way easier on the ol bod to just have the factory ripped out and leave the play pen! That way they are not committing murder.

El - I agree with you. I have known too many women (young women) who have had abortions. Nearly every one of them did not make that choice lightly. Nearly every one of them had been raped by relatives and did not want to risk having a child. One was gang raped by men she did not even know and for her it was the best decision. I also know one woman who used is as a form of birth control - 5 abortions in as many years. The sixth was her last - literally- she died from it. She left three living children for her very aged mother to raise.

I, too, wish those who do not want their unborn child would adopt them out. BUT that is their choice. Actually, the only true way to do what Traveler is saying - getting rid of the mentality is by sterilizing those who have the bad mentality. Oh, wait - isn't that what Hitler wanted to do????

[Traveler]

And forcing a mother to give birth to a baby that, for whatever reasons, she knows she can't take care of is not the brightest choice of a society that understands the importance of the next generation either. Because once that child that you insist be born is here, it will most likely be abandoned to a life of cruelty, starvation, poverty, neglect and hatred. But hey, the baby was born.

I understand adoption is a viable option and should be used in these situations. In fact I wish every woman who finds herself with an unwanted pregnancy would adopt.

Unfortunately, these things are complicated. Babies growing in their mommy's tummies for nine months can't be ignored and it creates a bond. Once the little one is born, the mother feels this rush of fierce love and suddenly thinks she's going to be different! "I can take care of him. I won't let anybody hurt him." "I can be a good mother to him." I'll figure out a way to take care of him!" "He's mine!"

So, you are no one to judge. Not because you disagree with abortion, but because you don't want to understand why a woman would have an abortion, other than, of course, to have pleasure.

Elphaba

Thank you for your efforts. I do want to make clear that I believe there are a few problems with your logic. I understand, I think, why you are having a problem. That is why I try very hard to keep focused on the right things and not get side tracked.

1. It is hard for me to come up with a scenario where there is an unwanted child yet to be borne and there was not an abuse of a woman and even possibly a man and still possible is an individual that has abused themselves. Just because there have been serious abuses already I am not willing to sacrifice an unborn child to ease the stress on someone already so concerned with themselves they are willing to take the life of another.

2. I do not like the logic of mercy killing. I do not accept at all that since things are tough or going to be tough for somebody that we should kill them so they do not have to suffer. It is bad enough when someone wants to end it for themselves because things are tough but when they want to end it for someone else – well to me that is an indication of insanity (criminal insanity – which is the worse kind of insanity I know of). That person should not be allowed to make important life choices. I would also point out that in the last 200 years it is most likely the best time and opportunity in history for people to rise above difficult circumstances. None of us would be here today if it was not for someone willing to sacrifice a great deal (perhaps even their life) for their children (the next generation).

3. I also have a hard time with the concept of – we should not force someone in to not taking another life. I think this is as good example as any of when force ought to be applied – that is to save a life. I am glad you have compassion for someone – if I could just convince you to have compassion for the “innocent” one in this whole mess. The only reason to have any law is to “FORCE” someone to do something that they do not want or intend to do. When it comes to taking a life – I think it is time to use force to stop such a thing.

4. I do not like it when people in position of power (what ever that power is) over someone else are determined to solve problems – not by doing something about the root cause of the problem but instead by wasting resources trying to alter the result of the problem. Such efforts are dishonest and even criminal. No sane person with any kind of intelligence is going to cheer efforts to change outcomes while fighting against any efforts to consider first doing something about the cause(s).

5. I find it interesting that you are accusing me of judging someone – which I have but not to seeking to end their life but you do not mention the horrible judgment of someone that judges another life not worth even existing. There is something very wrong when there is a problem and some are determined to solve that problem by laying the greatest punishment on someone that did noting to cause the problem. This logic is like giving every one on the high way a $1000 fine because they let a crazy driver pass them or run into their parked vehicle that was in a place 50 feet off the road.

The first object of the law must be to protect the innocent – the more innocent first. The second obligation of the law is to punish the guilty. It is corrupt for any society or government to think first to protect the guilty by punishing the innocent. I do not find any of your excuses for taking a life acceptable. If someone is trying to take your life, I hope that you would remember my arguments and use them to their fullest – I would strongly suggest that you not use any of the arguments you have used in this discussion thus far. Do you really believe this stuff you are saying or are you just trying to make some point about another opinion or view? I know there are points of view and arguments – I am just quite surprised when someone pretends to believe such nonsense – that is, till such nonsense is directed at them. If and when such a thing should happen to you I would hope that I would be around to protect your life. You may want to keep someone like me around – just incase.

The Traveler

[Traveler]

'Um, what is the man doing in all of this. He is part and parcel of the pleasure Traveler? why hasn't he had himself fixed? Yep, just like one does to pets, if you are a responsible pet owner that is, you take your pets in and have them neutered and spayed.

Thus if the man is participating in all of this pleasure business, then let him take himself to the Dr and get himself fixed.

For that matter, the women you are talking about should go and get themselves sterilized also. If all they wish to do is have pleasure and not have babies, it would be infinitely easier, cheaper and way way easier on the ol bod to just have the factory ripped out and leave the play pen! That way they are not committing murder.

El - I agree with you. I have known too many women (young women) who have had abortions. Nearly every one of them did not make that choice lightly. Nearly every one of them had been raped by relatives and did not want to risk having a child. One was gang raped by men she did not even know and for her it was the best decision. I also know one woman who used is as a form of birth control - 5 abortions in as many years. The sixth was her last - literally- she died from it. She left three living children for her very aged mother to raise.

I, too, wish those who do not want their unborn child would adopt them out. BUT that is their choice. Actually, the only true way to do what Traveler is saying - getting rid of the mentality is by sterilizing those who have the bad mentality. Oh, wait - isn't that what Hitler wanted to do????

Your arguments and points are interesting - But I have no idea at all to what they are directed. I have only stated that taking the life of an unborn child has nothing to do with ending the cause of unwanted pregnancies. Before this discussion is moved to any other point of view or concept – I want to make sure that everyone understands I will not accept any arguments as being rational that results in the taking of an innocent life. I see no reason to discuss any other points while this one remains open.

The Traveler

[Annabelli]

<div class='quotemain'>

Traveler:Not just women - children do not happen in a vaccum. Men are more famious for persuing pleasure over the good of children (society).

I see. So there is some sort of genetic connection to men and women who choose pleasure over children? Or do you see it as an absolutely learned behavior? Perhaps both?

I want to make sure I have this right. You're saying, in a particular line, the majority of women will choose to abort the male and female children in order to satisfy their need for pleasure.

This will continue with each subsequent generation of the line, because these women will continue to choose to abort their male and female children in order to satisfy their need for please. Eventually, all of the males and females will be aborted, and the line will be extinct. Is this what you are saying?

Elphaba

Note to Prison Chaplain: PC, I don't think this is tongue-in-cheek. I think he's serious.

Evolution is not just biological. There is intellectual, social, political and even economic evolution. If you understand the process of evolution – each generation is in essence playing with the cards (genetic and otherwise) dealt by previous generations. Do you follow this logic?

When a person chooses to abort their children rather than raise and teach them, they cut off any direct contribution they will pass on to the children of the next generation. If you understand the trends of evolution then the continuation of any mind set is throttled (not by its current popularity but) by its access to the next generation. It does not matter how any given mentality is passed on – it must be passed on or the evolution of it will end.

It is a proven principle of evolution – what survives must be instilled in the next generation in a manner that will be passed on to following generations. The most successful at this simple principle of evolution has the highest propensity of survival – or continuing.

So I ask the question. Am I a complete idiot or is there viable logic here – worth passing on to the next generation?

The Traveler

This evolution is somewhat like children born out of love. People who marry for companionship and those children are not born out of love. Children born of incest/rape and children born from adulterous affairs.

So now we are honoring PC with a good ol' abortion debate....

I thought it was going to be a roast. Turns out it was just off topic.

[Elphaba]

Thank you for your efforts. I do want to make clear that I believe there are a few problems with your logic. I understand, I think, why you are having a problem. That is why I try very hard to keep focused on the right things and not get side tracked.

I'm sorry, but staying focused is not your strong suit. In the future, if you wish to continue the discussion, I would appreciate it if you would cut your sentences in half and stay on target. I'm rarely sure if I'm responding to what you're actually saying and I have a feeling this is where we're miscommunicating. Brevity and conciseness makes for a better dicussion. Thanks.

Before I go on, I want to make myself clear. My goal here is not to argue whether abortion should be legal or illegal. What I am trying to do is to illustrate one of the reasons thousands of woman have abortions. Too many people, like Traveler, think it's a matter of convenience done casually without no thought for the child. And I admit, there are women who do this.

But there are thousands and thousands of women who are not like this, and they are shuffled into the "convenient" card deck of the women above, when in fact their reasons for having an abortion couldn't be more different and gut-wrenching. The women I'm describing are poor, abused, often drug-addicted, hopeless and despondent, and they realize that bringing a baby into their world will only doom the child to a lifetime of the same.

So, on to my discussion with Traveler (I can't get the quotes function to work. Traveler's remarks are bracketed by the word "quote.")

1. It is hard for me to come up with a scenario where there is an unwanted child yet to be borne and there was not an abuse of a woman and even possibly a man and still possible is an individual that has abused themselves.

This is a perfect example of what I'm talking about regarding your wording. I have no idea what you're trying to say in this sentence.

Just because there have been serious abuses already I am not willing to sacrifice an unborn child to ease the stress on someone already so concerned with themselves they are willing to take the life of another.

I obviously was not talking about easing the stress on the mother; I was talking about the stress on the life of the child that would result if allowed to be born. An abortion, taking place early while still a fetus, prevents the INNOCENT CHILD from a lifetime of pain. I wasn't talking about the mother, and if you go back and read my post I think that is very clear. Your bias is preventing you from seeing that.

2. I do not like the logic of mercy killing.

Yet you agree it is logical. The mother who aborts this fetus looks on it as a mercy as well as she doesn't want her child to suffer.

I do not accept at all that since things are tough or going to be tough for somebody that we should kill them so they do not have to suffer.

Obviously for the children I described things are going to go beyond mild suffering, much more than you can imagine. If you think it's alright for a child to be born into a home full of rage, violence, drug addiction, poverty, sexual abusive, neglect, and depression, then I question your definition of insanity. You know NOTHING about it, even though it's obvious you think you do.

It is bad enough when someone wants to end it for themselves because things are tough but when they want to end it for someone else – well to me that is an indication of insanity (criminal insanity – which is the worse kind of insanity I know of).

We're talking about a fetus at an early stage of development, not a live, human being. And I repeat, your ignorance of abuse, especially to a developing infant, baby, toddler, child and adolescent is the true insanity. People do not get over that and it ruins lives. That's why a loving mother might choose abortion.

That person should not be allowed to make important life choices.

Why not? The mother knows better than you or anyone else whether the child's life will be full of despondency, abuse, fear and hopeless as opposed to a life with the hope happiness, opportunities and most of all love.

I would also point out that in the last 200 years it is most likely the best time and opportunity in history for people to rise above difficult circumstances.

For many this is true, but not for everyone. Especially those who live in the circumstances I've already described. I know for a fact you've never experienced any of this by the way you write. That's what I mean by you have no right to judge.

None of us would be here today if it was not for someone willing to sacrifice a great deal (perhaps even their life) for their children (the next generation).

Hogwash. A little critical thinking concludes there are plenty of people on the planet who have children because they want them and becaue they love them. There are even millions of "happy accidents" that families can't imagine doing without. This is never going to end. It's as ridiculous as the argument that if we allow gay people to be married eventually there will be no more children born. Please.

The sacrfices these parents make are nothing compared to the women I'm talking about. The fact that you would compare them two is another indication of your ignorance and naivete.

3. I also have a hard time with the concept of – we should not force someone in to not taking another life. I think this is as good example as any of when force ought to be applied – that is to save a life. I am glad you have compassion for someone – if I could just convince you to have compassion for the “innocent” one in this whole mess.

I do have compasion for the "innocent." That is why I am pro-choice. Too many "innocents" are born into horrific circumstances and their lives are ruined forever.

You and those who think like you work so hard to get the baby born, but abandon it once it's here. Programs like Head Start, welfare, food stamps, etc., have been slashed by Republican congresses, putting more of these children that you insisted be born at high risk.

4. I do not like it when people in position of power (what ever that power is) over someone else are determined to solve problems – not by doing something about the root cause of the problem but instead by wasting resources trying to alter the result of the problem. Such efforts are dishonest and even criminal. No sane person with any kind of intelligence is going to cheer efforts to change outcomes while fighting against any efforts to consider first doing something about the cause(s).

Another nonsensical paragraph.

5. I find it interesting that you are accusing me of judging someone – which I have but not to seeking to end their life but you do not mention the horrible judgment of someone that judges another life not worth even existing.

You're right. Children born in these horrific circumstances are scarred for life, and mothers in these circumstances don't want their children to go through this pain. So they choose to abort the fetus rather than let their innocent children suffer through that.

There is something very wrong when there is a problem and some are determined to solve that problem by laying the greatest punishment on someone that did noting to cause the problem.

How is it a punishment? The fetus isn't conscious. It does not know what is happening. So there is no sense of "punishment." Rather, if the child were to be born into the circumstances I'm referring to, it would be an act of love.

This logic is like giving every one on the high way a $1000 fine because they let a crazy driver pass them or run into their parked vehicle that was in a place 50 feet off the road.

Nonsensical.

The first object of the law must be to protect the innocent – the more innocent first. The second obligation of the law is to punish the guilty. It is corrupt for any society or government to think first to protect the guilty by punishing the innocent. I do not find any of your excuses for taking a life acceptable. If someone is trying to take your life, I hope that you would remember my arguments and use them to their fullest – I would strongly suggest that you not use any of the arguments you have used in this discussion thus far.

The difference is that I am a live human being, not a fetus.

Do you really believe this stuff you are saying or are you just trying to make some point about another opinion or view?

Do you really believe that sentence you just wrote?

I know there are points of view and arguments – I am just quite surprised when someone pretends to believe such nonsense – that is, till such nonsense is directed at them. If and when such a thing should happen to you I would hope that I would be around to protect your life. You may want to keep someone like me around – just incase.

I have other people who would help me, thank you.

However, as I believe I have suggested before, I think you would do well to actually visit the poorer areas where women go for abortions, talk to them and discover the myriad of reasons they have them. You will find that some of them do have them for convenience, which I do not support.

You will also find that many have them for the reasons I have outlined. And it is not for their sake; rather, it is for the child's sake. It is because they love the child that would be born into hell. That is he mother whom I speak for. She exists and her heart is broken when she has to make this decision. And yes, once again, you have no right to judge her.

Elphaba

[Traveler]

The problem with death is that it is final for the one that dies. All the excuses you talk about as being worse than death are temporary. Everything you say is hopeless someone has survived and lived a fruitful life. I sorrow that killing and deciding to kill comes so easy to you. Yes, I know you have said that killing can be hard. As hard as you say it is you seem to not want to consider any alternative.

I think it is all a great lie - the evil of killing or taking an innocent life is done with love and compassion. As bad as you claim that it is for the mother and their horrible circumstance - they are willing to "Live" in it. The hypocrisy is classic. They would rather not die despite their hardship but none the less they will take away an innocent life. I do not buy it.

You call the unborn a fetus – a rather non-human term; yet that “fetus” is unique in all this vast universe and there is not another life form, anywhere, that is more like the mother than that unborn human fetus. Your efforts to detach any humanity from the unborn is chilling. There is a saying – What you do looks like you. There is a better course. There is a better attitude about life and the challenges of life. There is a way to make life livable and it begins by making life livable for others and no longer pursuing death to inconvenient innocence as a solution.

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

So now we are honoring PC with a good ol' abortion debate....

Don't think I haven't been noticing this disturbing turn of events, either.

[Elphaba]

<div class='quotemain'>

So now we are honoring PC with a good ol' abortion debate....

Don't think I haven't been noticing this disturbing turn of events, either.

I saw a-train's comment and didn't understand it. I should have stopped and checked out what he meant when I saw his post. Instead, I kept responding to Traveler. That was a mistake on my part.

I didn't make the connection that this thread was to honor PC, and therefore kept responding to Traveler. My comments took the thread off onto an entirely different direction that I am sure was upsetting to PC.

Therefore, PC please accept my apology. I promise you if I had made the connection that the thread was initially to honor you, I would not have discussed my feelings about abortion on this thread.

I seriously do respect you and feel very badly about this, especially because a-train gave me a hint and I ignored it.

Yours,

Elphaba

[prisonchaplain]

Elpha -- you really do struggle to interpret tongue-in-cheek humor, don't you. :-) The OP was about working together across faith communities. It did make reference to me and my posts, but, it wasn't "all about me."

Furthermore, the string had more or less died, when you went with your turn in direction. I even contributed to the diversion.

So, relax...and keep stirring the pot! :-) :-)

[Elphaba]

Elpha -- you really do struggle to interpret tongue-in-cheek humor, don't you. :-)

Yes, I'm afraid I do when when I think I've offended someone I really care about! I felt horrible when I thougt I might have upset you after what a-train said and then you're comment, though I did wonder about the tongue thingie. Believe it or not, I do care what people think, or, well, some people. You're one of them. :)

So, relax...and keep stirring the pot! :-) :-)

You mean it, DAD! I'm not in trouble?!?

I don't think I could anymore keep from stirring the pot than I could keep from breathing. But I do feel soooo much better knowing you're not upset with me.

Elphaba

[FrankJL]

I don't think she needs goading to "stir the pot", she seems quite accomplished at that.

[Elphaba]

The problem with death is that it is final for the one that dies. All the excuses you talk about as being worse than death are temporary.

No, they are not. I've explained this to you numerous times.

Everything you say is hopeless someone has survived and lived a fruitful life.

I agree with this. I am not trying to convince anyone to have an abortion.

What I am doing is trying to explain to you why someone would choose to have an abortion. I'm explaining to you a scenario that many women find themselves in where she feels an abortion is the right choice to make.

I sorrow that killing and deciding to kill comes so easy to you. Yes, I know you have said that killing can be hard. As hard as you say it is you seem to not want to consider any alternative.

Do you ever read to comprehend as opposed to reading what you want to hear?

I think it is all a great lie - the evil of killing or taking an innocent life is done with love and compassion.

And I think it is all a great lie when people like YOU insist this baby, who is obviously at high risk, be born but then insist that you have no responsibility whatsoever after that.

Post-natal care? Slash the funding! Head start? Slash the funding! Welfare? Slash the funding! Food stamp programs? Slash the funding! Parenting programs? Slash the funding! Post-partum depression programs? Slashing the funding! Breakfast programs? Slash the funding! Developmental programs? Slash the funding! After-school care? Mental health programs? Psychiatric services! Slash the funding! Outpatient services! Slash the funding! Slash! Slash! Slash! Slash!

All programs that have proven to help these high-risk children, to give them a chance to succeed at life, SLASHED by Republicans. It's immoral and despicable. But at least you Republicans get these children born!

So don't you dare tell me about the great lie when these high risk children are born, as people like YOU insist they be, and then they are abandoned, abused, hungry, and neglected, but none of YOU care about them once they're born!

As bad as you claim that it is for the mother and their horrible circumstance - they are willing to "Live" in it. The hypocrisy is classic. They would rather not die despite their hardship but none the less they will take away an innocent life. I do not buy it.

Of course you don't buy it. Ive suggested at least twice now you go and talk to these people, and you ignore my suggestion. So how do you know what it's like? You just "assume" it doesn't exist but it doesn't exist in your world.

You know what it's called? "Learned helplessness." It's the reason these women, these mothers, stay in these horrific circumstances. And you're right, it makes absolutely no sense. But they do it. And it does not matter one whit whether YOU buy it or not. You think all of this poverty, despair and abuse is going to disappear because YOU don't buy it? Sorry, but you have no power here. You're not magical. You can't just snap your fingers and make it go away. It exists whether you believe it or not.

You call the unborn a fetus – a rather non-human term; yet that “fetus” is unique in all this vast universe and there is not another life form, anywhere, that is more like the mother than that unborn human fetus. Your efforts to detach any humanity from the unborn is chilling.

That's because it is a fetus! Take it up with the doctor. Not me.

There is a saying – What you do looks like you.

Boo!

There is a better course. There is a better attitude about life and the challenges of life. There is a way to make life livable and it begins by making life livable for others and no longer pursuing death to inconvenient innocence as a solution.

I couldn't agree more. Are you a Republican?

[Elphaba]

I don't think she needs goading to "stir the pot", she seems quite accomplished at that.

From you, that would be quite a compliment, so I'm going to take it as such.

Elphaba

[prisonchaplain]

My further comments on abortion: of course there are many reasons to have abortions. Not all of them can be boiled down to convenience. Off the top of my head I can think:

1. Shame. If I abort, the baby will go to heaven, and my family will not be labeled "troubled" (I'm putting that mildly, of course)

2. Fear. My mother/father will hate me forever--and, in some cases, physically hurt me.

3. Fear-2. I cannot offer a future for this baby, and s/he will destroy mine.

4. Fear-3. Too many Cinderalla type stories of wicked stepparents. I don't want to adopt the baby out because the stepparents may do horrific things. Besides, it would cripple me psychologically to know s/he was out there somewhere.

5. Religion: This baby will go to heaven, and I willing to bare the guilt of keeping him/her from this miserable world. After all, this was my mistake.

All of this "reasons" are incredibly weak under the cold light of logic, sobriety, and calm. But, for a barely-teen mom without support, they can be overwhelmingly compelling. Then there are those school districts that say, "You don't have to tell your parents. We'll support you. This is your right."

[a-train]

I still think I should be allowed to kill a few brain cells with some kind bud now and again if every Jane Doe out there can have an entire fetus cut out. What a double standard! 'Control of her body' they say. But I don't have the same right!

Seriously though, I have a family member that did an abortion at 16. She was pregnant again so fast she actually bore the second pregnancy and had her son while still 17. He is now 11. She is still depressed and has great feelings of guilt and shame for her abortion. Although her family and friends are all very supportive, she just can't feel right.

I remember the first time she held my daughter. She simply wept right there in the hospital room with the infant in her arms.

I think the hardest part for her is the fact that the second child (who had the same father is the aborted) has grown up and had a decent life and she realizes that though it seemed impossible then, the reality was that she could have offered the same to that first child that was aborted. This is torture to her more than a decade later.

She has depression issues and is an alcoholic. Much of this stems back to the decisions she made while still a teenager.

We need to let our children know just what they are getting into. While they need to know there rights, it is much more important that they know the real consequences of the choices at hand. I don't blame those that didn't tell her what was going on, I think none of them had had an abortion nor understood the full ramifications of her decision. Now we know and we need to let others know what they are getting into.

-a-train

[Traveler]

And I think it is all a great lie when people like YOU insist this baby, who is obviously at high risk, be born but then insist that you have no responsibility whatsoever after that.

The first responsibility is to those involved in the cause. The secondary responsibility is to the family and friends (support group) of those involved in the cause and the last responsibility is to society. Let us not get this backwards

Post-natal care? Slash the funding! Head start? Slash the funding! Welfare? Slash the funding! Food stamp programs? Slash the funding! Parenting programs? Slash the funding! Post-partum depression programs? Slashing the funding! Breakfast programs? Slash the funding! Developmental programs? Slash the funding! After-school care? Mental health programs? Psychiatric services! Slash the funding! Outpatient services! Slash the funding! Slash! Slash! Slash! Slash!

There is a gross misunderstanding here in government funding. The idea was started in 1960 when it was discovered that if just 2% of the USA gross national product was transferred to the poor, we could do away with poverty. Since 1960 the amounts and percent has increased so that we are now transferring over 20% yet we have worse poverty. Funding has not been slashed – we have made the situation worse. Just a side note here - The USA takes over 60% of funds from poverty programs to support the bureaucracy.

All programs that have proven to help these high-risk children, to give them a chance to succeed at life, SLASHED by Republicans. It's immoral and despicable. But at least you Republicans get these children born!

Not one of the programs you are talking about as proven to help has done anything to reduce the number of high-risk children.

So don't you dare tell me about the great lie when these high risk children are born, as people like YOU insist they be, and then they are abandoned, abused, hungry, and neglected, but none of YOU care about them once they're born!

Just because something is better than feeding children to crocodiles does not mean that it is a good and desirable thing and must be supported. We know what is best for children and that is what must be encouraged or we contribute (either directly or indirectly) to the abuse of children. I would like to see your data that adoration has had any significant effect on reducing abuses to children and convincing anyone that would abuse children from such a thing. I feel quite differently – The attitude that justifies adoration is the basis of abusive attitudes and is more justification than a deterrent. It is very much part of the problem and not at all a solution. At best it is a band aid that does noting to prevent anyone from preventing or avoiding more wounds.

You know what it's called? "Learned helplessness." It's the reason these women, these mothers, stay in these horrific circumstances. And you're right, it makes absolutely no sense. But they do it. And it does not matter one whit whether YOU buy it or not. You think all of this poverty, despair and abuse is going to disappear because YOU don't buy it? Sorry, but you have no power here. You're not magical. You can't just snap your fingers and make it go away. It exists whether you believe it or not.

The best of man has evolved from much worse - your sense of helplessness is not a true sense. Just because someone believes a thing does not mean it is true. Almost everyone that takes a life believes there is justification - It is said that Baby Face Nelson believed his killings was doing the world a favor.

Are you a Republican?

No - I have not had anything to do with the Republican Party since Nixon. I have been political active and served as the legislative chairman (over all the lobbyists) for the PTSA in the state of Washington. I also was involved in the Presidential campaign of Alan Keys.

The Traveler

[Elphaba]

My further comments on abortion: of course there are many reasons to have abortions. Not all of them can be boiled down to convenience. Off the top of my head I can think:

1. Shame. If I abort, the baby will go to heaven, and my family will not be labeled "troubled" (I'm putting that mildly, of course)

2. Fear. My mother/father will hate me forever--and, in some cases, physically hurt me.

3. Fear-2. I cannot offer a future for this baby, and s/he will destroy mine.

4. Fear-3. Too many Cinderalla type stories of wicked stepparents. I don't want to adopt the baby out because the stepparents may do horrific things. Besides, it would cripple me psychologically to know s/he was out there somewhere.

5. Religion: This baby will go to heaven, and I willing to bare the guilt of keeping him/her from this miserable world. After all, this was my mistake.

Along with the incalculable number of reasons women choose to have an abortion, these fit right in. I've never thought of the "stepparents," issue, although, anecdotally, I have seen a child be abused by his adoptive parents.

I also know of a woman who adopted her child out, and her life was hell because of it. She was a horribly unhappy woman, alcoholic and just could never let it go that she gave her baby away. I'm sure if she had had an abortion it would have been the same, if not worse.

We all have anecdotal stories, I suppose.

All of this "reasons" are incredibly weak under the cold light of logic, sobriety, and calm.

Perhaps. But some of them are true, and added to your list could be the very realistic fact that she may have nowhere safe to go. If an abortion means her survival, I would want her to choose her survival.

But, for a barely-teen mom without support, they can be overwhelmingly compelling.

I think you've just stated what I meant by her having no where to go. So perhaps we're on the same page somewhat.

Then there are those school districts that say, "You don't have to tell your parents. We'll support you. This is your right."

When do the school districts say this? I'm not saying they don't. I just don't know about it.

Elphaba

[Elphaba]

I still think I should be allowed to kill a few brain cells with some kind bud now and again if every Jane Doe out there can have an entire fetus cut out. What a double standard! 'Control of her body' they say. But I don't have the same right!

I don't mean to demean the issue of abortion, but I too believe you should be able to kill a few brain cells with a bud now and again.

Seriously though, I have a family member that did an abortion at 16. She was pregnant again so fast she actually bore the second pregnancy and had her son while still 17. He is now 11. She is still depressed and has great feelings of guilt and shame for her abortion. Although her family and friends are all very supportive, she just can't feel right.

I remember the first time she held my daughter. She simply wept right there in the hospital room with the infant in her arms.

I think the hardest part for her is the fact that the second child (who had the same father is the aborted) has grown up and had a decent life and she realizes that though it seemed impossible then, the reality was that she could have offered the same to that first child that was aborted. This is torture to her more than a decade later.

She has depression issues and is an alcoholic. Much of this stems back to the decisions she made while still a teenager.

In my post to PC I mentioned my friend who gave her child up for adoption and was obssessed with it for the rest of her life, at least as long as I knew her. In fact, I would be very surprised if she were still alive. She was a raging alcoholic because she could not stand the pain of having given up her baby. And I know that if she had aborted her child her pain would have been just as bad.

I also know a few women who had abortions who have never felt any regret. All they felt was glad that they could have a legal and safe abortion at a time in their lives when they felt it was the right thing to do. In fact, I personally do not know a woman who was sorry she had her abortion.

I am not saying women do not regret it. I know they do, to varying degrees, many quite badly. Obviously your family member is devastated about it, and I don't have any words that would would make it all right. I wish I did. I can't imagine the anguish she must feel. I really can't.

We need to let our children know just what they are getting into. While they need to know there rights, it is much more important that they know the real consequences of the choices at hand. I don't blame those that didn't tell her what was going on, I think none of them had had an abortion nor understood the full ramifications of her decision. Now we know and we need to let others know what they are getting into.

I know you're talking about a child here, and I agree with you. Young teenagers need so much support in this situation. However, not all parents are going to agree on the solution.

Some parents are going to want her to get an abortion and will support her with this, and she'll be fine with it for the rest of her life because of that suppport. Other's will support her in not having an abortion, and she'll be fine because of their support with that as well.

In the case of women who seek an abortion, I see nothing wrong with counseling. I don't think, however, the assumption should be made that a woman will automatically suffer for the rest of her life.

Every woman's circumstances are different, and no one can make that call. However, I have no problem with clinical full disclosure. And if the woman wants to talk about her circumstances, fears and hesitations, I see no problem with that either. A sensitive counselor might even talk a woman out of an abortion if he/she senses the woman doesn't really want the abortion.

However, I do have a huge problem with someone pushing his/her own agenda onto the woman. It is the woman's choice, and that is how it should be.

Elphaba

[the Ogre]

My thoughts about abortion are mixed and indeed garbled and so I just use the church's declaration as a safe harbor, however I have to say I am PRO-Child.

What does this mean? If the many people in the world who despise abortion are pro-life, then they must take responsibility for the children they are forcing into the world. Traveler made a statement regarding the disbursement of government and national wealth to the poor. I do not care what goes on with the money, the kids have rights that no one is considering.

Children must be safe. Every child has the right to an education and a balanced and equal playing field. Children then have the right to make choices that are not indicative of socio-economic status or educational status.

Too many of those who oppose abortion and say give the child up for abortion then turn around and then want to cut funding to schools and pro-child programs.

That is disgusting.

I am not saying the poor should have abortions, or that school budget cuts legitimize abortion. I am saying, if someone is going to be pro-life, they need to be pro-equal quality of life.

What is disgusting is that there are more abortion clinics near poor and minority neighborhoods then other places. What is this, eugenics through equal opportunity abortion?

If you are pro-life, you had then best be pro-child as well and make sure the kids that survive abortion have the same rights as any other child.

[pam]

My daughter who is adopted was almost an aborted baby. Thank goodness the mother waited too long to have it done.

[FrankJL]

<div class='quotemain'>I don't think she needs goading to "stir the pot", she seems quite accomplished at that.

From you, that would be quite a compliment, so I'm going to take it as such.

Elphaba

What I do? (how do like that as an English major?)

Remember I'm a libertarian so on political topics I can stir the pot from all angles.

Take this oft repeated abortion debate. I'm clearly pro-choice, and for whomever said they want to smoke pot too, go for it I have nothing against that either. Libertarians are all about personal choice, so long as your choices do no harm to another's person or property.

Then again, I would completely disagree with you on the need to fund all these silly programs that have very little positive results to speak. All FDR's "Great Deal" plan did was make sure that our nation would never get out of debt and provide incentives for slothful behavior. See us Libertarians also believe in a true smaller government. When we say limited government we mean real limited government, not the tripe that modern Republicans and quasi-Conservatives peddle. Medicare part d prescription plan, NCLB, Patriot Act, "guest" worker programs, FISA, etcetera, etcetera, ad nauseum. No wonder the old school real conservatives, like Thomas Sowell are dismayed at what the great political movement they founded has devolved into.

[Elphaba]

The first responsibility is to those involved in the cause. The secondary responsibility is to the family and friends (support group) of those involved in the cause and the last responsibility is to society. Let us not get this backwards

Like I said: Get those babies born, that's your cause! Then, if they're homeless and on the street, it's not yours, or society's problem. You're right, that is backasswards.

There is a gross misunderstanding here in government funding. The idea was started in 1960 when it was discovered that if just 2% of the USA gross national product was transferred to the poor, we could do

away with poverty. Since 1960 the amounts and percent has increased so that we are now transferring over 20% yet we have worse poverty. Funding has not been slashed – we have made the situation worse. Just a side note here - The USA takes over 60% of funds from poverty programs to support the bureaucracy.

You can bloviate all you want. Poverty, especially the lives of chldren in poverty, improved. Regan came along and slashed the programs and the poverty rate, especially for children, got worse. Then during Clinton the situation it got better, though Clinton didn't do as well, and now with Bush's immoral tax cuts the situation is intolerable and 20 years from now we are going to have a crisis on our hands as these children are going to be adults, and many of them are going to be illiterate, unemployable, mentally ill, homeless, and even worse, criminals.

Not one of the programs you are talking about as proven to help has done anything to reduce the number of high-risk children.

Yes they have. Head Start

Just because something is better than feeding children to crocodiles does not mean that it is a good and desirable thing and must be supported. We know what is best for children and that is what must be encouraged or we contribute (either directly or indirectly) to the abuse of children. I would like to see your data that adoration has had any significant effect on reducing abuses to children and convincing anyone that would abuse children from such a thing. I feel quite differently – The attitude that justifies adoration is the basis of abusive attitudes and is more justification than a deterrent. It is very much part of the problem and not at all a solution. At best it is a band aid that does noting to prevent anyone from preventing or avoiding more wounds.

Another one of your nonsensical paragraphs. Please, rewrite this sentence using 1/3 of the words.

The best of man has evolved from much worse - your sense of helplessness is not a true sense. Just because someone believes a thing does not mean it is true. Almost everyone that takes a life believes there is justification - It is said that Baby Face Nelson believed his killings was doing the world a favor.

Equating a desperate woman who is considering an abortion to Baby Face Nelson is a Straw Man. Back to the issue: You refuse to go see for yourself the women I'm talking about. Go to Social Services, or its equivalent, in your area. Visit the Planned Parenthood office in the poorest part of your state. Visit a Battered Women's shelter. Talk to the women I'm talking about. Until you do that, you have nothing credible to say about the issue. Nothing.

No - I have not had anything to do with the Republican Party since Nixon. I have been political active and served as the legislative chairman (over all the lobbyists) for the PTSA in the state of Washington. I also was involved in the Presidential campaign of Alan Keys.

Ah, Now it all makes sense.

Elphaba

[FrankJL]

Involved with Alan Keyes, that does say a lot. I don't see how anyone could support that carpetbagger.

[the Ogre]

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>I don't think she needs goading to "stir the pot", she seems quite accomplished at that.

From you, that would be quite a compliment, so I'm going to take it as such.

Elphaba

What I do? (how do like that as an English major?)

Remember I'm a libertarian so on political topics I can stir the pot from all angles.

Take this oft repeated abortion debate. I'm clearly pro-choice, and for whomever said they want to smoke pot too, go for it I have nothing against that either. Libertarians are all about personal choice, so long as your choices do no harm to another's person or property.

Then again, I would completely disagree with you on the need to fund all these silly programs that have very little positive results to speak. All FDR's "Great Deal" plan did was make sure that our nation would never get out of debt and provide incentives for slothful behavior. See us Libertarians also believe in a true smaller government. When we say limited government we mean real limited government, not the tripe that modern Republicans and quasi-Conservatives peddle. Medicare part d prescription plan, NCLB, Patriot Act, "guest" worker programs, FISA, etcetera, etcetera, ad nauseum. No wonder the old school real conservatives, like Thomas Sowell are dismayed at what the great political movement they founded has devolved into.

Oh yeah, laissez faire is great. Small government is great. Do what you want, but when the economy falters, you can starve too. That is what I love about libertarian. Real humans. Great patriots. Real lovers of freedom

Oh, you want a level playing field? Here we'll give you one. No rules. You need help because those who have utilized the hands-off system before were actually a bunch of bigots. Bigot who used such a system to oppress the poor and educationally disabled. Too bad. Fix it yourself, no one is stopping you. In fact it seems you have picked to be poor. See how agency works? One chooses poverty and there is no reason why I should help anyone who is so foolish as to choose to be poor. You could have chosen to be what ever you wanted, but you have chosen destitution. Oh well. Whatever you want. Laissez faire for all.

[Elphaba]

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>I don't think she needs goading to "stir the pot", she seems quite accomplished at that.

From you, that would be quite a compliment, so I'm going to take it as such.

Elphaba

What I do? (how do like that as an English major?)

Remember I'm a libertarian so on political topics I can stir the pot from all angles.

Take this oft repeated abortion debate. I'm clearly pro-choice, and for whomever said they want to smoke pot too, go for it I have nothing against that either. Libertarians are all about personal choice, so long as your choices do no harm to another's person or property.

Then again, I would completely disagree with you on the need to fund all these silly programs that have very little positive results to speak. All FDR's "Great Deal" plan did was make sure that our nation would never get out of debt and provide incentives for slothful behavior. See us Libertarians also believe in a true smaller government. When we say limited government we mean real limited government, not the tripe that modern Republicans and quasi-Conservatives peddle. Medicare part d prescription plan, NCLB, Patriot Act, "guest" worker programs, FISA, etcetera, etcetera, ad nauseum. No wonder the old school real conservatives, like Thomas Sowell are dismayed at what the great political movement they founded has devolved into.

Yes, I know. And I would agree with you on many of those.

But you're young, Frank. As far as I know, and correct me if I'm wrong, you have yet to have need of any of these programs. If it weren't for Medical when my son had a neuroblastoma tumor in 1980 he would have died because I had no way to come up with that kind of money. If it weren't for welfare way back then I wouldn't have made it through university. If it weren't for Medicare part D I would be paralyzed with pain today. If it weren't for Social Security Disability I'd be on the streets.

When I look around at the people in my "predicament," I do not see sloth. I see people in need who are willing to work as best they can under trying circumstances. I've even met some of them on this site who put me to shame.

I don't like needing these things, and I am incredibly grateful to my country that I have them. I'm especially afraid, after getting sick and being so at the mercy of the system. I'm terrified my SSD is going to be taken away from me. I know that's not logical, but I don't feel anyone cares for the least of us anymore. And when it comes to the children who are at high risk, I don't think anyone gives a fig about them. Put me out in the streets, I don't care. But someone has to take care of them when those who should can't. How do they fit into your libertarian platform? I'm not being sarcastic. I really want to know.

Elphaba