Let's talk about abortion ....

I was in no way inferring that the Old Testament has no relevance to Christian Beliefs as it obviously does but that it is only the Christian Version of the Jewish writings that are applicable to Christian beliefs.

There are some cases where the original Jewish writings differ greatly from what is in the Christian Bible.

That was what I was trying to get across.

Sorry for any misunderstanding because I didn't word the posting better.

Col

Yes, REALLY SILLY.

Putting aside all arguments from all perspectives, abortion (killing an unborn human) is quite different to murder in the sense that it is normally used, and in which it is used in the legal system.

Euthanasia is often classed as murder, but abortion -- no, not yet, and not ever I hope.

When the day comes that every woman who has an abortion is tried for first degree murder, well ... the mind just boggles at the absurdity of this.

It would mean that every woman who has an abortion after first giving birth to one or more children, would be sentenced to a long prison term leaving her naturally born children without a mother.

Please, can we agree that there is a middle ground in this debate?

And because I associate with disreputable types like Judges and Senior Legal People mostly QC's over here I'm a little different to most people as I know what is required by the Judges.

What can never happen in any Court of Law no matter where it is in a Democratic Country like the USA, UK, Canada, Australia or places like that is that a LAW CAN NOT be broken by the Court. That is to say that any breach of the LAW can not occur within the confines of a sitting Court. Now while I'm not any form of expert on the Roe V Wade case or any other US case for that matter it should be obvious that once a case reaches the Supreme Court in the US which from my understanding is the Highest Court of the Land {it's totally different over here} the case must be heard by the Legislation that is currently in use. At that point in time the Legislation can not be changed as the Legal process has gone too far.

However if the Authorities do not approve of the Legal Ruling they are free to overturn the ruling by changing the Legislation. Now it is my understanding that in the case of Roe V Wade that the Court took the view that the State Legislation was in conflict with the Country's Laws. This is quite common and happens all the time over here but it is clearly stated in our constitution that when a state law is in conflict with a federal law the federal law takes precedence and extinguishes the state law. This is what I believe happened in this case. Also when it happened it then took the rights away from the state in question to change the legislation but it by no means took away the rights of the Federal Administration to change Federal Legislation, now we come to the real crux of the matter when a precedent is found by a court awarding a Federal Authority Power over the State they very rarely hand it back as to them it is an unexpected present and like all bureaucratic bodies the bigger their department and budget the more important they think they are the same applies to the Administration as well. After all it is my understanding that the case that you dislike the outcome to is quite old and there have been several different Administrations since it was heard all of which have refused to change their Legislation to hand the power back to the State.

In all my time dealing with Legal people I have never heard it expressed in Court that a Law under a Civil Proceeding is stupid {even though the individual players may think so outside of the court} and I can not find one single occasion where a Court has said that this Piece of Legislation is Unworkable Rewrite it to the Authority that wrote it they have to work under the existing Legislation or the Court System would be more of a mess than it currently is.

I hope that goes some way to explaining how a Court actually works and while some of the facts may not be a perfect fit the basic outcome is always the same the Court just has to make a ruling on what is before them and not recommend to the Authorities that they rewrite the Legislation.

Col

As that is a fairly good description of what goes on in my home. Now that the children are old enough not to be any longer living at home we both are still willing to help them as required and there have been occasions when the wife has just left the house to do something for one of the children without feeling the need to inform me of her actions I'm sure that the same applies from my side of things as well but they would be mostly work related.

However I have seen some of the Evangelical Christians who seem to apply this quite differently and as they are all US based religions I would tend to think that the same applies there as well as here with these "Christian Religions" they seem to believe that the wife is some sought of property to be trotted out for show when required and never allowed to speak as the MAN KNOWS IT ALL!

This I am appalled at and find it personally unacceptable to me it is more along the lines of the Orthodox Muslim faith rather than the Christian Faith.

However that was the way things where in the earlier Christian Faith and the women where even held up for ridicule for tempting the males to indulge in the "Pleasures of the Flesh" this was taken to the extreme durring what we now call the "Middle Ages" where males would be castrated to prevent them from wanting to indulge but eventually the Church ruled that this was unacceptable as the male should be making the decision and not removing the temptation.

Actually a lot of things where very different in the Christian World prior to WW11 that was about the time that women where told that it was their duty to go out and work to support their men as a lot of the males where away fighting and there where not enough left to produce the vital requirements to keep the worriers supplied with everything required. So the Government called on half their current population which was doing very little to help out. If you have a good look at history you will find that prior to WW11 there where very few married women actually working but durring and after the war this changed rapidly and has led to the current position we find ourselves in today.

Col

I do not know or care if you have had to deal with teenage children but speaking from experience I can tell you if you tell them not to do something they are bound to do it!

I believe it's called growing up and learning from their mistakes and while I whole heartily agree with this course of action I do not believe that one mistake should become a life sentence.

When the previous poster mentioned deformities these are a fairly common occurrence with all pregnancies and from what you seem to be implying they just do not seem to matter. Well my friend they certainly do if only for the emotional damage that is done to the parents when the child is born only to die several minutes latter or is still born.

Also there are numerous complications that can occur durring pregnancy which can and do led to the death of both parties namely the mother and unborn child.

As recently as the 70's the Catholic Church used to say that the unborn child had a greater right to life than the mother and it was a sin to undergo a "Surgical Termination of Pregnancy" to save the life of the mother. To them they did not seem to care that both may be lost which to my way of thinking is very cold hearted.

Also what I'm really impressed with is the fact that no one has so far mentioned the long term complications of pregnancy that can and do occur the smallest one is incontinence in the woman which is at the very least embarrassing and quite often leads to long term physiological complications which are impossible to cure as they spring from a very real physical problem.

I would like to ask here just how many males would be prepared to put up with this side effect on themselves?

Col

I can see you are just like me intending to grow old disgracefully.

Col

Sport provided it is approached safely and with the proper teacher who sole purpose should be to teach the kids it's all in the game and how you play it rather than winning at all costs.

Have a look into what is being taught before you allow him to go into the sport as the wrong teacher could lead to permanent disabilities or something far worse.

Aren't kids great fun?

Col

The really silly thing here is that if that was to happen the State would then be supporting the woman in jail while at the same time refusing to support the same mother if she had the child.

Maybe it's just me but I see something really stupid here.

Col

I can just see it now some White House Intern becomes pregnant to the MAN and is forced into having an abortion just because the guy has the money and position to force the issue.

It should never happen!

Col

A married pregnant woman who believes the market hype and wants to stay as what she considers "Beautiful" is suffering Anorexia Nevosia and slowly starving both her and her child to death.

No my question is how does this woman get the help she so desperately needs?

Should as the Pro Life movement claim she should be strapped to a hospital bed have a tube forced down through her nose to supply nourishment and catheters put in place to carry away the waste products until the child reaches term or close to it as possible?

Or is there some other recommended treatment that would be more beneficial to both the mother and child?

Now bear in mind that this person had no previous sings of any physiological problems until she began to show and it was at that stage that she began to see her self as fat and horrible.

Just what would be the best treatment for her as by now her husband is at his wits end in attempting to reassure her that she is in fact beautiful to him and has exhausted every treatment available to him in the remote location where they live.

Col

I wasn't sure if John was referring to asylum granted (in California, I think) to Chinese nationals, who have had to endure their government's mandates on population control, marriage rules and reproduction limitations, or something else entirely involving American citizens.

China has all kinds of limitations - one can't marry before a certain age (22?) or there is punishment, pregnancy practically has to be scheduled and permitted by the government - or abortion is forced, illegitamacy is not tolerated- abortion is forced and sterilization is also forced in certain cases. It is sickening.

The very severe and inhumane punishments have not deterred pregnancies. It is hard to say if it is "Civil disobedience" (Civil? - no way) or contraception failure, forced sex, rape, human nature or other factors that are foreign to me and the culture I live in.

(They need to hear about abstinence - right?)

Also, there are a few ugly cases where anti-abortion groups had attempted to stop abortions done on mentally incompetent, severely handicapped and institutionalized rape victims.
Where the life within had more rights that the incompetent and incapable mother.

One was in Florida in 2003, that one I am sure of when and where, the others would require a search.

Maureen

My husband wouldn't let our six year old son wrestle, he said it was too dangerous. He's such a mother hen.

It will be good for him I think. It is entirely different from anything he has done so far. He likes soccer and basketball, didn't like baseball-though that may change.

Maybe it's perfect for him - we'll see.

Mae, it's funny when the dad is the "mother hen," isn't it? Just when I think there will be no disagreement on a choice...

I gotta get out the door - see you later.

Maureen

Concerned about his welfare in wrestling!

I can just see it now you saying tear the other kids arm off and beat him to near death with the soggy end.

As we like to say this side of the pond "NOT BLOODY LIKELY!" But is is such a help with kids if you can pass the buck to your partner so you look as if you are the good guy and not the kill joy!

Col

I wasn't clear about the implications of the unique DNA of the fertilized egg. I intended that point to be a rebuttal of one of the pro-choice arguments that the egg and resulting embryo are just part of the mother's body so she has the right to do whatever she wants to do to it. This argument from the pro-choice people attempts to equivocate abortion to the same type of procedure as any other elective surgery, such as liposuction. I will address your question in a moment but first I want to respond to your assertion that I evidently support human cloning.

I do not support activity intended to create human clones. There is nothing in anything that I have written to suggest that support human cloning. The persuit of experiments in human cloning requires that the participants adopt the attitude that the embryos are a disposable commodity. Everything that I have written in this forum supports the opposite view. Reading through your posts in this discussion has caused me to conclude that you often suggest that if someone says one thing then they must also believe another thing. Typically your assertions of this type are flawed, just as your assertion that I must believe in human cloning is flawed because it is not supported by anything that I have written. I now hold the opinion that you are not making posts in a good faith effort to conduct a serious discussion. Rather, I believe that you amuse yourself by making specious arguments.

Lastly, your assertions about the placenta and the amniotic sac are exactly the kind of thing that I am talking about regarding specious arguments. Your comments fly in the face of reason. Any reasonable person can make the distinction between a part of something versus the whole. Obviously, and I don't use the term easily, the placenta et. al. are no more a complete human than are the 'baby teeth' when they fall out and are replaced by the adult teeth. Duh.

You two are wonderful and I do not believe for a single nanosecond that neither of you would not be concerned about the welfare of your children.

I know it makes it very easy to look like this when your men are putting their foot down as you can escape the problems with the kid playing one off against the other parent {for supposedly uninformed innocent children they are very good that this form of manipulation aren't they?"

You two will in all likely hood love the following, when my two children where young I would tell them to go play on the road in front of an oncoming semi-trailer as at the time we lived on a main road these where very common and you know what every time I said things like that I was ignored by the kids. If I said some thing sensible like do not do such and such they would immediately go and do it and hurt themselves. I'm grate-full that both my children are so old now as I'm sure that if they where young I would be facing Child Abuse claims by the medical profession and the like as both of them where little horrors who caused far more problems and injury that what I considered possible. My son was so bad that if we didn't attend the ER at least every 2 days they would ring up to inquire what had gone wrong. At least back in those days the medical staff understood and where not looking for child abuse at every turn.

I suspose it also helped that both of them rode a gurney down a flight of stairs while in the care of the medical staff on one of the many visits to the ER. The staff where horrified particularly when both kids insisted on doing it again it didn't matter that they crashed into a wall and both needed to be stitched for the cuts that they got they both just wanted to be patched up and do it again.

I think that both their charts where marked as "NEVER TO BE LEFT ALONE UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES!" But they where both little horrors and it was only after I had worked out their plans that I began to get the upper hand. When they fell over and hurt themselves they would only cry if they where in our view "attention seeking" so I instead of running over to them looking and sounding concerned I would go over and if blood wasn't gushing out complain about the damage that they had done to either the floor or ground. This always brought about an immediate stop in crying and very close looks at where they had fallen over.

But what made matters worse was the fact that the dogs would not allow the kids to be smacked or otherwise punished they both would get between the adult and child and cry and a Great Dane is not something to be lightly ignored. The Danes however where not the slightest bit concerned about inflicting their own form of discipline when the kids got out of hand with them they would just get up and proceed to walk away but as they passed with their rear quarters they would swing their hips and send the child flying toward the ground.

Finally I gave up and allowed the dogs to handle the kids it is a really funny sight to see a Great Dane walking down a street and a couple of legs the other side but the child was not tall enough to be seen over the back of the Dane.

Both of these dogs which had absolutely no road sense would make sure that neither of the children got anywhere near the road and the one woman who tried to rescue my daughter from that terrible dog just never stood a chance as the dog kept her well away from the child at all times as well as keeping the child away from the edge of the train platform.

You really had to be there to see it as it was so funny. The dog was a wonder with both children and the bitch was even more protective. If anything it got worse as the kids got older as they where inseparable from both of the dogs at all times and when school started the dogs nearly went mad as the children where not within their sight which was something that neither of them had ever had to go through previously. Eventually they relented and walked the kids to school and where at the gates when they got out but any other time they never where allowed out of the sight of either of the dogs except for the times that the Bitch was in season then all bets where off as the dog had his mind on other things and while the bitch was concerned about the welfare of the children she settled for just making sure that they remained inside the house.

When we had worked out just how we where being manipulated by the kids we both changed our plan of attack and almost everyone was horrified by the way we spoke to the kids by telling them to do obviously dangerous things the more dangerous it was the less likely the kids where likely to even attempt it. They both seemed to be of the opinion well that's alright with mom and dad so it must not be any fun so they where not interested in doing it.

It was about that time that the many trips to the ER started to drop in frequency and eventually stopped all together except for the occasional incident where one of the two was hurt by something but they never went there together with similar injuries again.

I know I'm rambling again but I'll try to get to the point now I know both of you would kill to protect your children and even while you might admit to your very close friends that you do not have children but demons in disguise you would both jump on anyone outside of your inner circles who said the same thing!

Col

The woman?s role in society (particularly western society) has changed a great deal since WWII. I am an aging generation X?er. I graduated from high school in the 80?s so my wife and I are in our mid 30?s. Now our generation and for that matter the generation before ours saw both parents working while the kids went to school. It was very rare for the mother to stay home and take care of the family as that role was not only disdained by the feminist movement but financially the average family could not afford to make it on one income.
My wife and I were doing very well as we were both working professionals. When our two boys were born we decided that we didn?t want them to go to day care so we split our shifts and enlisted the help of family to help while the boys were young. This got old really fast. So after a few years we made the leap, I changed jobs, we sold the house and moved to a different town all so my Wife could stay home with the kids. It is the best thing we have ever done. We might not have the income we once had but our family is better off for it. I ask my Wife often if she misses her work and says that sometimes she does but it takes developing different habits and she says she wouldn?t trade it for the world.

My argument is this:
I often have this debate with people who will not accept Biblical ideology or doctrine so I must formulate an argument based on logic and reason. In the United States there are legal and medical definitions for death. Medically one is considered to be ?biologically? dead when one?s heart stops beating and one is considered to be ?clinically? dead when brain activity ceases. Now the legal definition of death matches the ?clinical? definition as there is no recovery from that state. Now given this scientific definition of death we can then say that the inverse of death is life and so life therefore begins when brain activity begins. As is common knowledge brain activity begins long before the child is born. So it is equally abhorrent to murder a child of two as it is to murder a man of seventy-three as it is to murder a child that has not been born yet. Life is not contingent upon form or age. It is contingent upon brain activity that causes the autonomic systems of the body to function.

Perhaps I misunderstand what you?re saying here. If I am please elaborate. What I read is that you believe that children who would be born into impoverished homes or to less than favorable circumstances should be aborted? This sounds somewhat draconian to me. Seems to remind me of something that went on in Europe in the 1930?s though.

Yes, I have refered to my 4 children as 'the demons' on many occasions, however, if anyone looks cross eyed at any of them and the mama bear comes out fighting.

My husband is definately the more protective, not that I'm not, but he takes it to the extreme, he would try to protect against any bump or bruise, and I am of the opinion that they're just going to get them and get on with life. For instance, last week, the little one went ass over head down the stairs, he just got shook up, no injuries, and while it scared the bejesus out of me, it ruined the rest of my husband's day as he played the 'what if' game in his mind afterwards.

Your children would have made my hair white in a matter of days, they sound like they were a handful. I'm lucky, my older boy got stitches once when he was 7 and Joey, so far, has never had to go to the emergency room. When I was a kid, I made yearly visits for stitches due to stepping on glass, falling into fountains and jumping on beds..and then there was the 'riding the foam mat down the stairs' incident. I'm glad my boys aren't as adventerous as I was.

I was talking about helping those very alive and living people NOW.

The comment wasn't about abortion at all.

People are suffering now. People are impoverished now. People live in horrible conditions now. People are incarcerated now. People are drug addicts now. They need tangible help NOW. Not theoretical help. Not "what if" help.

Spin, spin, spin!

Maureen

So far there have been between 37,000 and 100,000 deaths of civilian lives in Iraq. Does that mean that abortion is a higher moral issue than the invasion of Iraq and the loss of life there? Who can deny that some of the people that are killed over there are pregnant women? Isn't that also a kind of abortion?

On the other hand, I believe that just because you're opposed to abortion doesn't necessarily make you pro-life. This is particularly true if all you want is a child born, but not a child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed, and so on. Those who follow that belief would be so because they might not want any tax money to go there. To me, that is not pro-life, it is pro-birth.

I am sorry I hadn?t intended to spin anything. I was trying to follow the string but I got lost in the middle somewhere. I thought this was about abortion. I will go back and re-read the posts to try and make some sense of it.

The discussion was about the quality of life, in its potential, and as it exists.

Oy, vey!

Assertion about unique human DNA in a different light. Where I think the misunderstanding came about was from the following sentence that you posted "I am an atheist and I am pro-life."

I was only posting the bit about the placenta and all the rest to point out that because a cell contained Human DNA it doesn't necessarily follow that it is human or necessary to a human for life. Sorry for the misunderstanding. I REALLY AM SORRY THAT I MISUNDERSTOOD YOUR MEANING!

The bit about cloning was very tongue in cheek as many people here have posted that one criminal act {like rape or incest} in no way makes another criminal act namely Abortion a legitimate or right decision.

While the point was not specifically aimed at you I did want to provoke some comment about this very point as the Pro Life Lobby seem to want to categorize criminal acts as some being acceptable and others not acceptable like the destruction of a Human Ovum for cloning purposes as being illegial but rape not being grounds for a Terminations of pregency.

Did I want to stir the pot YES!

But not necessarily at your expense but I did want to point out the Hypocritical way of thinking that some have posted here in this discussion. It was unfortunate that you gave a description that made it possible to post this particular thought pattern and if you are offended I apologize with out hesitation.

However many have posted here that they consider Abortion as Criminal and they do not see any advantage for allowing one criminal act to justify another. I was attempting to point out just how Hypocritical these people actually where.

So I took advantage of your definition to do this. As you are obviously a sensible person I'm sure that you can understand the point I was trying to get across.

By the way the production of human clones doesn't require the destruction of a embryo but only a single Ovum. While it is typically a normal thing to do to use a viable embryo right at the moment this is only because of the techniques that are required, as currently Sperm can be frozen and remain viable, Fertilized Ovum can be frozen and remain viable but Ovum themselves can not be stored at all as the freezing process destroys them.

Actually if taken to the obvious conclusion actual cloning doesn't really require the destruction of a viable embryo either as only one cell is required for cloning purposes so it would be an easy procedure to just remove one cell from an early stage embryo and clone from that or if unfertilized Ovum where available they could be used as well without requiring the destruction of anything that some people may like to consider human.

Once again I'm sorry for any misunderstanding that has arisen here that directly affects you and it was never my real intention to put you in the firing line but to do nothing more than point out just how silly some of the other posts actually where.

Col

Would I think it acceptable to terminate a fetus early in a pregnancy if I knew that it would not live long after birth? Hell YES. The devastation is far less and a lot easier to live with as well, but again that is a personal decision that should be thought about by the individual and then after all the facts are available they make their decision. What you have to remember here is the costs involved as well. Not only do they incur the hospital costs but also the funeral costs so close to the birth of the child/children the costs can be horrendous and more often than not are the cause of marriage breakup as each party involved blame themselves for what happened.

"Look into the eyes of a child (or adult) with Down Syndrome and ask yourself if they are suffering or if it would be better for all if that person were not allowed to live." well this depends on how badly they are affected and what facilities are available for them it was not so long ago that Down Syndrome teenage girls where regularly raped in the institutions where they where placed for their own benefit. In those days almost every afflicted child was sterilized upon reaching puberty so that they could not continue the contamination of the Gene Pool {sorry if you take offense to the previous description but they are not my words I'm only repeating from the Hand Books of the time}

However with any deformity no matter how bad it may be it should be the right of the person involved to make a decision based on uncontaminated information about what would be best for the child. Severe Down Syndrome cases require life long care and most times these children outlive the parents who where willing to support them but are left on the scrap heap after their support network dies. Institutions are no longer the preferred way to keep these children in now days and while this is a vast improvement over what used to happen these individuals still remain vulnerable and do so all of their lives,

I also find it totally reprehensible that some people will trade on these people to steal from them for their own personal gain and leave the deformed person that much worse off and on most occasions no longer in a position to be self supporting with a little outside assistance

Currently there are not enough facilities available for those who suffer life long injuries from some incident that leaves them permanently crippled and with both Government and Private funds becoming far harder to obtain these people are going to suffer more.

Now introduce a Severe Down Syndrome person into the equasion and to some they are a ready target as these people tend to be very trusting and do not have the life experiences to understand that not everyone is nice and good.

What I did find funny was your mention of Spina bifita. Well I was born with a mild case of this and around the age of 25 or so it became a major problem, it also was not picked up until that time either but I was subjected to constant abuse from the Caring Profession about me being a wining wingeing person who was unwilling to get off their own backside and help my self. For some strange reason that all changed after a simple X-Ray was taken but I never did receive an apology from any of those so called Caring Professionals for the way that I had been treated by them prior to them knowing about the spinal deformity. Granted it is mild and was not highly evident like some severe cases are but I still require a maximum dose of pain killers per day and have done so since 1975. I'm regally told by the new breed of Doctors that I'm addicted to the drugs that I take and i am constantly derided by these people. Particularly since I will not play nice with them as they want to perform surgery on me without any valid reason and no form of better outcome likely.

However if I was to play nice with them it would involve at the very least a 6 - 12 month hospital stay and quite likely I would be tied to a wheel chair for the rest of my life, but then they would be happy to give me the drugs without hesitation.

Do I wish that I'd never been born YES EVERY DAY PARTICULARLY WHEN IT RAINS AS I'M FAR WORSE ON THESE DAYS.

Maybe if I did as instructed by the Doctors and refused to work and live on Government handouts I might suffer a bit less pain but I consider the BRAIN DEATH that would follow by being constantly tied to a TV as my only form of outside data gathering and the constant stream of garbage TV that is broadcast under the guise of Drama and Entertainment! Over here that are called SOAP'S ands you can not escape them as they are on all channels at the same time so I could sit at home watching the BS for the Brain Dead and grab another Valium every time I see so & so scheming to take down a perceived enemy or whatever but I do not chose to do this.

While I can work I do and because of my background I get a lot of work but in all honesty if I was an employer I would not employ myself as I'm just far too unreliable as I might be unfit for work anything from a few hours a month to weeks at a time.

I now have staff to cover for the times that I'm incapable of working. I will not bother to mention all the special equipment that I require to just sit down or walk for more than 100 yards let alone running a Consulting Company with several permanent staff who have to be paid no matter what I'm feeling like on the day.

Incidental my father died 22 years ago and my mother just turned 76 so she will not be around that much longer but of course I will be even though on some days I just wish to die where I am.

Have you any idea of just how bad it is when you can barley breath because of the pain let alone move so you can be slightly more comfortable?

Constantly caring needles and syringes around along with injectable drugs for short term pain relief. Having to carefully chose what car you buy so you can use it, or worse still having to pay someone to fix something that I should be able to in 10 minutes and paying a premium price for substandard work!

I face this every day and personally I do not like it one little bit but it is still better than the other option so you can quite rightly say I'm choosing the lesser of two evils!

But sitting this side of the fence I have some very strong views about these things can you in all honesty say the same?

Col

Of the woman above the life of the child!

Shouldn't it be if both are alive then each should have the same level of protection in the eyes of the Law?

Col

Until you walk in those people's shoes, don't be so quick to say "that's life."

You don't seem to know what losing a child feels like - so don't tread on the eviscerating pain that your friends and I have experienced. Sometimes silence is golden. I hope you weren't one of the bobos who uttered "It's all for the best" when your friends lost their child. All that pain is not for the best. The God I know is full of love and helps me in that pain, but he did not wish it on me. That is the God I must believe in.

In a child's death a mother's frame of reference is utterly destroyed. Her embrace which wraps the wraiths of hopes and dreams so alive in the heart, finds but emptiness in the arms.

You don't know what that feels like, and I hope you never will. ( A father is sorely affected also. For the mother there is the physical difficulties which ties in with post-partum and grief. The breasts scream, and there is no answer.)

Somewhere in this tangled web of a discussion we have going here, I asked whether you might volunteer to help inner city/urban kids to mend their ways.

Your response was you have enough with your two kids. Fair enough.

Currently or in the foreseeable future:

Your kids talk;
Your kids walk;
Your kids can feed themselves;
Are toilet trained;
Can dress themselves;
can bath themselves;
Brush there own teeth;
Comb their own hair;
Go to school;
Play sports;
Will have a conversation with you;
Will marry and have kids of their own;
Will live a life.

But you have enough with your own kids.

Each stage of their growth brings you to a new one.

However, the now elderly parents with a Down's syndrome child who is 40 have a child in an adult's body, and is mentally around 10-12 years old. There is love and exhaustion.

But you, and everyone else, has enough with their own kids.

For this family there are no rites of passage, as most children mature and grow from baby to toddler to child to preteen to adolescent to independent adult. Their child had been a child for 30 years now.

But you, and everyone else, has enough with their own kids.

He had Down's today. He had Down's yesterday. He will have Down's tomorrow. No matter how much help these parents have gotten, there is no improvement. Do they love their child - absolutely. Does he love them yes - but not as an adult.

But you, and everyone else, has enough with their own kids.

But,like Sisyphus, the boulder has to be rolled uphill again tomorrow. And they are alone.

But you, and everyone else, has enough with their own kids.

Ask anyone who endures any type of chronic difficulties whether it is their own problem, or their children's, help is scarce. Oh yeah, when the diagnosis or baby was new, everyone was around. The need for help doesn't change; most volunteers want to see they have made a difference. Most want to be there when the drama is great. Most people want to help when they know there will be a visible result.

But you, and everyone else, has enough with their own kids.

If you truly have the love of life burning within you, then find a way to show it to someone who needs your care and concern. There are lots of those who are born already. Help make their lives better. There is a ministry in that.

But you, and everyone else, has enough with their own kids.

Abortion is easier to talk about, isn't it?

Maureen

Please ignore.

Col

Please ignore - your posting?

It's so annoying when you can't take it off- that happened to me already.

Maureen

Can also see that although a huge price has been paid in previous conflicts (like world war 2 for instance).
(This may be a good topic for another thread......)

Nobody argues and history validates this action which for all the blood and all of the fighting, prevailed against tyranny that existed at that time. Many millions of people died (military and civilian alike) but the result was the bringing down of Hitler and the nazis that had an insane dream of world domination. There is another insane group of people bent on world domination, and defeating them will save millions of lives and is worth a hard faught battle in my opinion (and I am not alone). In ww2....although tragic, civilian casualtiy was a far bigger problem than it is in Iraq today. No one advocates it, but when people go in to battle, these things happen on both sides and have throughout history, and our troops have no monopoly on it. No army in history has done more to minimize it than the coalition troops in Iraq today, and I salute them for it. History will provide context that the news cannot provide today.....I for one believe that the future of the region will ultimately be much better and much more free than it is today.....History will tell.
I can imagine that few during or shortly after ww2 believed that japan or germany would embrace democracy and stabalize.......

What you described may be what is practiced now in the Federal judiciary in the US, but there is a school of thought known as "Strict Constructionism" and "Original Intent" (subscribed to by Justices Scalia and Thomas on the US Supreme court) that states that the plain words of the law should take precedent, and when a decision is in conflict with the plain words of the law, then it should be overturned. I understand in cases where the law is vague, that case law (and common law) does and should take precedence. But some decisions are in conflict with the plain wording of the law.

In the USA, the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. However, there have been several decisions by the courts that did not comply with the plain wording of the constitution and have been since overturned many years later despite years of case law that supported them. The most famous example would be Plessy v Ferguson in 1896, which allowed racial segregation in the USA. However, over 50 years later, the court rightly overturned this decision with Brown vs Board of Education in 1954, which stated that segregation violated the "Equal Protection" clause. Plessy v Ferguson was in conflict with the plain language of the Constitution, and Brown v Board of Education restored the law to what the Constitution intended in its plain language.

I hold then that Roe v Wade, which created a right to abortion throughout the entire United States, is unconstutional according to the plain language of Amendment 10 to the Consttitution, which plainly states that those powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states. Since abortion is not mentioned, then it is up to the individual states to decide on the matter within their jurisdiction, so that some states may permit it without restrictions, while other states could be allowed to treat it as murder, or put lesser restrictions if they choose, with whatever penalties they choose. The 10th Amendment is the guarantee of a Federal system, where most powers are reserved to the states, and few, enumerated powers are given to the Federal government.

You did respond to my comment about judges, but I still do not have your response to what ministers may say. Your comment seems to state that ministers should be restricted in what they may tell their parishoners. But in the USA, freedom of speech and religion should permit ministers to tell their parishoners who they should vote for, and parishoners may do whatever they want (comply, disobey, or ignore). Does Australia have restrictions on what ministers may tell their parishoners? I hope not, because I thought Australia was a free society, especially when you consider that Australia innovated the secret ballot.

It basically said something about me thinking that the post had been placed in the wrong area as I couldn't see how it applied to me and asking for clarification because "I'm such a stupid person."

While a bit more eloquently worded that was the basics of the posting.

If it hadn't have been from you I just might have related some of the more horrendous cases that I've run across and let it get a Little more personal but I notice that the person in question hasn't as yet replied to my posting as I don't suspose he expected that in a reply and needs a lot of time to think of a come back to at least look a bit credible. I used to work Medical Experimental surgical equipment and some of the things that I saw there where terrible. But the worst one was a 6 year old girl who was a burn victim who ran away from the hospital wards a couple of hours before her 50th or so operation for skin grafts. As the child that she was she just didn't want t go through the pain and suffering that she was being exposed to in the name of keeping her alive. I found her in my area hiding out and while I did call it in so they stopped looking for her I didn't say where she was and talked her into wanting to go back if only for the benefit of her parents.

It is impossible to tell just how low I felt when she thanked me for my time and effort as she walked with me back to the ward and to the inhumane treatment that was to follow.

After that I began to see that we treat our animals far better than we treat ourselves and all for some hideous reason about just how great Human life is.

Col

Goes a long way. o:0)

What a time that must have been for you - the poor little kid! Some of us have had some really deep and life-changing affect our views.

The thread had reached its limit, so that's why the posting went where it did - you know it was NOT directed at you. It was late when it was posted last evening, and this discussion has had so many splits and threads, it's beginning to be hard to know where to put the replies.

I don't post at work - so that's why when all the other east coast Yanks are posting, I am not. I am way too busy, and still learning the product line.

Did anyone do a "Friday YUK" yet? I hadn't spotted one, and I have to go off to soccer!

Later and take care

Maureen

No problem in states with right-to-work laws, where union shops are illegal. If you disagree with the union, you do not have to belong to it to work your job, and at the same time, management cannot prevent unionization. However, in states without right-to-work laws, people have to join the union in a union shop even if they disagree with what the union stands for. I would like to see more states enact right-to-work laws to protect the rights of workers to belong or not to a union with no compulsion either way.

War is a terrible thing. People get hurt and some die in war. It is an unavoidable consequence. I wonder though why the parents of those children allowed them to stay in harms way? I understand that was their home but would it not have been better to leave until the fighting was over rather than to stay and risk the lives of ones family? Thousands of men and women did leave Fallujah. What these pictures are not showing the public is the cause of this bloodshed. It can not all be attributed to the US military. I know for a fact that a US Marine cares a whole lot more about where his rounds are going than an untrained insurgent. They have a lot of weaponry that they?ll fire off for any reason at all.
The war is a tragic thing yes ? but should we then say ?well we kill people in wartime so infanticide should be alright.? That is utter nonsense. When I define myself as Pro-life I mean it. I don?t want innocent people killed any more than you do.
You stated ?I fail to see how on one hand you claim the Surgical Termination of a Pregnancy is MURDER and the civilian deaths are not rated to the same level.? In some instances it is the same. We are not there and can not see what is going on or who is shooting whom. We see the pictures and read the reports and we shed tears for the injured and dead. The end result is the same but the difference is in the heart. In one instance a person is knowingly and willfully entering the uterus and ending the life of a baby who can?t run away. On the other are people (yes some children) who are unintentionally killed as a result of an armed assault.

"Murder is the illegal act of taking the life of another human being"

A fetus is not a human being, it is a human fetus. It all depends on whether you believe that life begins at conception. Life at conception is life, but it isn't a human being until it is born into this world.

Some abortion is humane. Some is necessary. All of it is tragic and unfortunate, but there are many valid reasons for it. I would rather have an abortion than have a child that I knew had severe birth defects. I wouldn't have a child if I was raped. I don't want to be forced to have a child because the law says so.

Abortion is ugly, but it should remain legal. It is the most personal decision a woman will ever make and it is between her and her God and values, not her and her government.

E-mail it to you.

Cheers Col

Over here we have something similar as the Federal Government has tried very hard to break the union power base which is a treat to them.

What the outcome was that you no longer need to belong to a union but if a union derives any additional benefits for its members they are only passed on to the union members and the non union members have to negotiate with their employer for any additional benefits.

As this didn't have the results that the Government wanted they then brought in Individual Employment Contracts which again where fought by the unions and while they still stand again if a union reaps any improvements for its members they are only available to the members and the non union members now have no leg to stand upon as they have a singed contract on their employment which specifically limits any pay increases to a CPI indexed level if at all.

Currently most of the industrial action taken bu the unions is about worker entitlements that may be lost if a company goes insolvent. The unions have setup a system for companies to pay into as a form of insurance but it is non binding on the companies and the Federal Government has tried very hard to prevent this from spreading as they seem to think that the workers do not have a lot of rights in this regard. However one company that did become insolvent and lost all of its workers entitlements was bailed out by the Federal Government to at least the point of paying the entitlements but there where a couple of mitigating factors here first was the fact that the director involved was the brother of a Senior Government Minister and the second was that an Election was due within the next 12 months so the Government just paid out the money to limit any possible damage.

Also when Anset Airlines failed {which was a big one here} through mismanagement by their parent company Air New Zealand the Government started a ticket levy to pay the workers entitlements of $10..00 AU per ticket for domestic travel. At the last report on this matter it was disclosed that the Government had collected about 1,5 times the expected payout value of the claims and had only made minimal payments to those involved. The Ticket Levey still stands raking in millions per week for the Government and it now appears that it will continue as a new Tax which is diverted straight into Consolidated Revenue.

Col

Has started it under the heading "While we are waiting for Oz to get out of bed" or something similar.

You'll find it quite easily if you look for that heading in the "New" discussions.

That little girl died 3 days latter but the really sad thing is that if it had of happened today they would have been able to clone her shin and she would not have had to go through all those painful treatments and in all likely hood would be alive today. I can not help but think I contributed to her suffering.

Col

our bowling league this morning, and I have a baby shower to attend. This baby was born back in August, and his mother wasn't due until Dec. 5th. He weighed 1 lb 8 oz at birth. He's now just under 5 lbs. and the doctors say he will be going home in 4 - 5 weeks. This is truly an amazing child, and while they won't know the extent of his disabilities for a while, it seems that his only problem is chronic lung disease, which will clear up in about a year. He'll probably have asthma and his eye sight may have suffered, but other than that, they believe he's okay.

The human race has been a blight upon the earth.

We have exploited its resources, created massive destruction to the environment, developed nuclear materials which take thousands of years to degrade to a safe level, and we still haven't found a fool-proof place to store this nuclear waste.

We have created the greenhouse gas effect, which if not halted shortly, may in time render the planet inhabitable for humans.

We have made extinct (that means GONE FOREVER) innumerable species of flora and fauna.

When will the "pro-life" people learn to see the whole spectrum? The last thing the earth needs now is an increase in the numbers of humans to further despoil our beautiful planet.

Contraception is of course much preferred to abortion. But surely the future of the planet and the future of our grandchildren and great gandchildren must carry a higher value than moralistic attitudes towards abortion.

While in more recent times, some poorer countries (especially India and Brazil) have depleted the natural forests for the more immediate needs of fuel and space for growing crops, I consider that the greatest villain in the destruction of the environment is the Judeo/Christian religion.

Note: Genesis 9:2 "And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth [upon] the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered."

I would be most pleased if someone could point me to some passage in the Bible which asks humans to respect and revere the lower kingdoms (animal and vegetable).

Long live Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism and any other religion which encourages a respect for the lower kingdoms.

To the detriment of the planet and its myriad species of flora a fauna, the Judeo/Christian religion is human-centred at the expense of all the other wondrous creatures and plants which God has given us.

When abortion was legalized in the United States there were 167,000 child abuse cases per year (it was legalized in 1973). By 1979 there were 711,000; in 1982 there were 1,000,000! Britain experienced a tenfold increase in child abuse after liberalizing abortion laws.

Why are the majority of abortions performed?

Answer: To escape the repsonsibility of wrong choices.

Anger at a child can not be catergorized in this manner.

Child abuse is a learned pattern from the parent's life and how s/he was treated as a child.

Please start another discussion thread if you care to discuss this.

Maureen

I believe that the Orphanages that where around a long time ago would now days be considered as "Places of Hell" if their practices that where used then where allowed to be used now.

Also speaking as a parent here and a very long time ago I was politely informed by a Social Worker that if I changed my daughters soiled nappy I would be sexually abusing her because I would have touched her genitals but at the very same time if I refused to change that same nappy I would also be abusing her by neglecting her.

Now I do not know how these people learn but if for one minute they think anyone gets their jollies by changing a soiled nappy they do not need a Degree in Social Work but to be locked up for their own protection. However the one thing that I have always noticed is that the people involved in making these stupid ideas up have no children or experience themselves. They all rely purely on what is written in book again by others with no actual experience of child rearing so for this reason alone the reported cases of child abuse have escalated dramatically while the actual criminal cases of "Child Abuse" have not risen all that much and in a lot of instances declined.

What is missing here is the application of the LAW as the welfare agencies seem to think that it is better to remove the child and forget about the crime. While this "Touchy Feely stuff" might make you all warm and fuzzy inside it is nothing but a crock of SH1T because with out criminal prosecutions there is no actual proved child abuse only alleged cases of child abuse which the authorities are unwilling to take before a court because they will be shown to have acted improperly and open to claims against themselves as both an organization and them personally for making defamatory reports and defaming statements about the so called abuser.

I'll let you in for a bit more the next time you post. As I've worked in this area I can tell you now that it would be safer to keep your head down and keep quite as I'm more than capable of blowing you argument right out of the water I've done it to people a lot more well placed in these organizations so much so that I've been invited in to give my views to Parliamentary Inquiries and on every occasion they have been followed because my ideas are reasonable and LEGAL unlike the silly ideas that you are sprouting off.

Col

YOU ARE SIMPLE UNBELIEVABLE!

May I suggest a good therapist for you?

Col

"there was a choice to do this all in a non permanent relationship (i.e. marriage)." [I have corrected your spelling].

Man, do you live on the same planet as the rest of us? Are you not aware that people in permanent relationships actually have abortions also?

I wouldn't know the figures of course, but from my own experience over, say, 45 years, a significantly high proportion of women whom I know have had abortions, have been either married, or in a de facto relationship which was intended to lead to marriage.

that perhaps peers, teachers or some other person will have a positive influence on the kids.

Col, I am acquainted with a few people who grew up in Bible-thumping homes who have left that life behind them.

What would Buddha do?

Maureen

According to most of the research I have come accross, the majority of abortions are performed on single women between 16-25.

In regard to my children, boy or girl, the same truths that I was taught will be passed down. Sex is only for husband and wife, no exceptions. So no, you don't have to worry about the "love 'em and leave 'em scenario".

The statement, admittedly, was made for shock value, and apparently worked. :) If a man makes a child, he should, by his own will and volition, take responsibility.

Let me put it this way, if every single woman who was going to have sex with a man, made said man sign a "you will be around to support me and my child if I get pregnant clause"; premaratal sex would probably drop drastically.

Historically, it is also interesting to notice the rise of the abortion topic is strangely close to "Free Love" revolution...

I will summary my point and be done:
1) A child is a human being at the moment of conception and has all rights and protections garnished thereby.
2) Sex outside of marriage is wrong.
3) Abortion is murder.
It is interesting how many societal problems vanish when God's standards are followed.

To "FORGIVE HIM" but then Kundon is a very forgiving person which is only to be expected as he is supposed to be the reincarnation of the Compassionate Side of Buddha.

Speaking from experience he is a very forgiving person who holds no ill will toward anyone not even the Chinese who invaded his homeland and have attempted to wipe out all Tibetan people. He always found it amusing that anyone would want to either hurt or kill him and found me being used as a Bodyguard funny, but I did get to speak to him quite a lot in those days.

However as I come from a different discipline I would be tempted to try to educate the person into a better understanding of his position and role in society and particularly his role in bringing up his children.

As Kahlil Gibran the great Lebanese Poet said quite eloquently in one of his poems

"Your children are not your children.

They are the sons and daughters of life longing for itself.

They come through you not from you,

And though they are with you yet they belong not to you.

You may give them your love but not your thoughts.

You may house their bodies but not their souls,

For their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow,

Which you can not visit, not even in your dreams.

You may strive to be like them but strive not to make them like you

For life goes not back-wards or tarries with yesterday.

You are the bows which your children as living arrows are sent forth.

The archer sees the mark upon the path of the infinite, and He bends you with His might that His arrows may go swift and far.

Let your bending in the Archer's hand be for gladness;

For even as he loves the arrow that flys, so He loves also the bow that is stable."

I think that is correct without any mistakes but it was from Kahlil Gibran's "The Prophet" which was written after he emigrated to America so it was written in English rather than a lot of his earlier work which was in Arabic and lost a lot in translation, and while he was a Catholic his words ring true throughout the ages to all religions.

Personally I think that is the best description that can be given of our children and every one that I have seen raised like that tends to be far more productive to society unlike the ones raised in a strict Religious household {no matter the religion} where they tend to break out and become at least a bit anti social once they are capable of leaving home or reaching an age where they can begin to think for themselves.

They do tend to try out everything that they where told not to indulge in and the harder the message not to do something was the more they want to do it in an attempt to find out exactly what it was that they where missing out on when growing up or once grown up what they can expect to find pleasure in.

A good example is found in the Jewish religion where wine is an every day occurrence and children are taught to consume it from a very early age with this upbringing there are very few if any Alcoholic Jews unlike the children brought up in a household where they see their parents consume alcohol but are barred from it totally and punished if caught having even a small drink.

The increase in alcoholism seems to me to stem from this style of upbring where the child is told not to do something but sees the parents or other adults doing it often, they want to know what they are missing out on. The same applies to illicit drugs as well while I in no way attempted to stop my children from experimenting with these when they where old enough they follow their parents example and just avoided any form of drug to such an extent that when they are sick they begrudgingly will take prescription medications but only in the smallest quantities that they can get away with.

Actually Maureen one day I'll send you two of Gibran's poems from the Arabic which are not what we would consider as poems but more like a short story one got him extensive praise from the church and the other got him excommunicated I'll bet you will be unable to tell me which is which.

Col

Good Morning Col,

What a beautiful poem that is! It is so true.
I appreciated your thoughts this morning. I am not as well-versed in the other philosophies as I would like to be, though I have a rough understanding of some of them.

I had written the "What would Buddha do?" as a reminder that there are many philosophies that are respectful and have great meaning in peoples' lives.

Even around here in the New York City metropolitan area, one might see "WWJD?" on bumper stickers, t-shirts, pens and that type of thing.

I worry when I see someone with a "Jesus loves you" bumper sticker on the car. I wonder if it is advertising that the person's driving will cause an introduction or two sooner than planned?

Later,

Maureen

And I want one it read I brake for Penguins and run over Gates and Windows.

I know it's totally unrelated but I did get such a laugh out of it that I just had to try to find out where the person got it from. Apparently she has no idea what it means as it was on the car when she bought it. She seemed to think it had something to do with destroying Penguin enclosures down south.

Kahlil Gibran on the other hand I would have thought that every one knew at least the one book "The Prophet" as it was such a big seller and like everything that Gibran did it is so beautiful in its simplicity but has a very real depth that takes a bit of looking to understand for some. I think it was one of his first English books after he moved to America.

Actually I should have described the Dali Lama as the reincarnation of the Compassionate aspect of The Buddha as that is the correct definition and actually he is considered as the 14 th reincarnation of that person who keeps returning to make sure that the people of Tibet are looked after. Sometimes I really wish I could reach the serenity that he has but my training leads me in a different direction. However there is one thing that really sticks in my mind that my master taught me a little while prior to his death and that was that all religions are the same and the only real differences is the society that they began in as different societies interprets similar events in different ways hence all the different religions which are basically the same except for the Dogma that is added by man.

That helps no end to bring peace to one who was trained from a very early age to fight not for myself but to protect others. So my preferred weapon now days is a plastic pen instead of any of the numerous other weapons that I used to use. It is truly mightier than the sword but you have to be a lot closer to use it properly.

Anyway Maureen I hope you appreciated the Poem as it is truth and should be part of the "Owners Manual" for all children. Gibran was so beautiful in his descriptions and definitions that they should be followed regardless of which religion you belong to. I hope it was word perfect as I couldn't lay my hands on the book and had to work from memory but even if a few of the words are wrong {which I doubt} the real meaning shines through.

Col

represents the "ditch" on the extreme right side of the road....

If you think that, then you should probably have your rocky mountain oysters removed dude...That is REDICULOUS......I hope you don't believe (or practice)this philosophy

Abuse is allowing someone to do something that is self detrimental and you only sit by and watch.

Col, I must admit, you are either a serious devils advicate, or deranged.

Life is a battle, choices to be made, mountains to conquer, decisions to be weighted. Who would send an "average Joe" with no training into Bahgdad (sp). Or, much less, who would send an "average Joe" to boot camp and allow to wander around as he pleases for a couple of months, then deploy him to a hostile area. No one would do this. It would be considered lunacy.

How much more our children. "Here you go child, go play in the world and figure it out on your own. No, not going to help you by imparting the experience I have gained; not going to guide you away from the pit. Here, step on every thorn and scrape your leg on every rock so you can have a full experience.

NO WAY!

I love an value my children to much to force them into such isolation and trauma. I know certain things need to be avoided, I follow a set standard for their benefit and fulfillment.

Sorry to say, what you call logic is frivalous rhetoric that is debunked by the most base of common sense.

Over two thirds of the worlds population are not represented by your understanding of truth.

Now in a democracy if a majority of people do not believe in something isn't it not accepted?

You are displaying absolutely none of the real Christian values of forgiveness or acceptance you are truly a fallen Christian. I only hope that there is some way back for you in this lifetime. But being of the religion that I am I will believe that you have many more lifetimes to go through before you even begin to reach a place where you can start to become content.

Col

Guiding and forcing your children to be like you.

Guiding involves teaching a set of values and then allowing them to find out for themselves what is right for them to follow and believe.

Forcing them to be like you is ultimately a self defeating exercise as life moves forward and does not tarry with the past.

You my friend are the past and your children are your future. If you force them to behave like you then there will be no development but only stagnation and nature abhors stagnation!

Col