I guess the troubles found in getting people to think of it as uneventful is that it's clearly not. You yourself do not view it as a non-event in your life as you implicitly make clear when you document the ways in which you think carrying out that first pregnancy would have altered your life. Having an abortion is fraught with implications for one's life (and other's lives) just as having a baby is. It's not trivial (even if the medical procedure often might be) and I don't think it should be regarded as such.

[ 14 June 2006: Message edited by: Dead_Letter ]

From wikkipedia:

quote:

---

The term originates with the Greek medical term, hysterikos. This referred to a supposed medical condition, peculiar to women, caused by disturbances of the uterus, hystera in Greek. The term hysteria was coined by Hippocrates, who thought that the cause of hysteria was irregular movement of blood from the uterus to the brain.

The same general definition, or under the name female hysteria, came into widespread use in the middle and late 19th century to describe what is today generally considered to be sexual dissatisfaction. Typical "treatment" was massage of the patient's genitalia by the physician and later vibrators or water sprays to cause orgasm. By the early 1900s the practice, and usage of the term, had fallen from use, until it was again popularised when the writings of Sigmund Freud became known and influential in Britain and the USA in the 1920s. The Freudian psychoanalytic school of psychology uses its own, somewhat controversial, ways to treat hysteria.

The knowledge of hysterical processes was advanced by the work of Jean-Martin Charcot, a French neurologist. However, many now consider hysteria to be a 'legacy diagnosis' (i.e.: a catch-all junk diagnosis), particularly due to its long list of possible manifestations: one Victorian physician catalogued 75 pages of possible symptoms of hysteria and called the list incomplete.

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

---

[ 14 June 2006: Message edited by: writer ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by morningstar:
deadletter
"sensible, non eventful" as in doesn't have to be turned into this huge, emotional circus. it can be like a late period, with none of the temptation,encouragement really, towards self flagelation.
abortion has been a part of womens lives for all known history ,from what i can tell-it is part of many womens reproductive lives.
what is contrived is the attempt to turn it into this oh so compelling , lets all angst about it event.
i can't understand why women aren't standing proud and defending abortion against what really amounts to slander.
why is everybody slinking around and only defending abortion in the abstract? ie the right to.. lets talk more about the good that it brought into our lives.
of course it wasn't fun, of course we would rather not have done it, but this is true of much of life. lets not keep shoving it under the rug.

there seem to be lots of weak nellies moaning about their regrets. i suspect that they are looking for attention or some strange societal paternal approval.
but they get the publicity and i'm sure that it must make young women feel worried and upset.
perhaps there are ways that women can say publicly, in a way that would be heard by highschool girls-, that we got caught, it happens to the best of us and its ok ,and we had abortions and we're glad we did.
it is my understanding that women with low self esteem have much more of a struggle emotionally post abortion. perhaps this should be spoken about more clearly.

---

BTW...when I mentioned that in Freud's day that women were not orgasmic...I certainly did not mean that to be the case of all women -- (certainly how could I know!) I would hope that and probably women were orgasmic -- I was basing that from reading up on Freud and his diagnosis's of women being 'hysterical' because he believed that was the underlying reason; and also that was the reason that he believed that many of his female patient's fell in love with him; because he would listen to them talk to him...ect.

Back to the subject matter; I think it is very brave to talk about abortions and that we should, no matter how old we are or how young we are, be willing to talk about it openly and candidly. To share one's experience no matter how terrifying only can serve to help another facing a similar dilemna. It's always been in one way or another sort of taboo to talk about; but I'm a person who will talk about anything to anybody; just because I deplore the social traditions that people regard that certain subject matters are acceptable, and other subject matters are not. Horseshit. I don't think that any subject should be taboo, not if it helps someone who needs to talk. And abortion has always been shrouded in this kind of way of thinking; especially where I live and surrounded by fundamentalists groups who are imo scarier than any kind of nightmare that I've ever had; this brings to mind that movie "If These Walls Could Talk..." the first one. does anyone remember? It's movies like these that open the doors for arguments one way or the other; but for the way that some groups have tried to take the choice away from women; and for the violence that they have turned to in order to make their (cough) statement; it's good to talk about it; and I encourage any woman, at any age to feel that you should be able to find like minded individuals to listen to you if there are things on your mind, or troubles you are facing. I for one am here if anyone needs my two cents. Or a shoulder to cry on; for that matter.

[ 14 June 2006: Message edited by: erroneousrebelrouser ]

We make choices that are the best choices for us at the time that we make them, once they are made there is no turning back. And so one has to learn to live with them. Learning to live with these choices which clearly were the best at the time sometimes can take a lifetime; and sometimes fears are never faced and instead are turned inward and as a result women who make these choices and never deal with them appropriately, never forgive themselves. This is a subject matter that I, along with you, would be interested in exploring, if not just for the sake of sharing knowledge; but hopefully in reducing the stigma, the ignorance, the damage it does to the women who cannot forgive themselves; and on and on and on.

I believe those decisions are made for a variety of reasons. For some, there is a belief that the fetus is a person, and no amount of 'good news' is going to change their mind.

http://www.westernstandard.ca/website/index.cfm?page=article&article_id=1727

I know people don't like links to the WS, but they did splash this story on the front page of their last issue and it's relevant to the topic of things that are keeping the good news away from MSM exposure. Here's an excerpt:

quote:

---

Another clinician in B.C. estimates she sees women wanting to abort unwanted female fetuses, motivated by gender preference, at a rate of one a week--though it's an extremely rough guess, since women don't always get into their reasons for choosing to have the procedure. Nor has anyone in Canada ever compiled data that measure live male births against live female births in this country, to ascertain any deviance from the norm of 1.05 boys to every girl. Until now...

An internal document obtained by the Western Standard from the Women's Hospital in Vancouver leaves no question that sex-selection abortions are not only practised here, they are accommodated. A Care Clinic presentation, from Feb. 9 of this year, was designed to aid health care workers confronted with "implicit or even express requests for sex selection." The document opens with the assurance that, "Most of us are uncomfortable with the idea of sex selection," one of the reasons being that the procedures "violate the principle of equality between males and females." Still, the document manages to reason through the drawbacks, adding that "not allowing sex selection causes increased harm to women who must endure repeated pregnancies in efforts to have a son," and "it is unclear if banning sex selection will benefit women." One case study offered for consideration is "Mary," who already has four boys, and who "during her routine 18 week ultrasound was told she is carrying another boy. She would like to terminate the pregnancy and try one more time for a girl."

As the Women's Hospital document confirms, sex selection is not an unfamiliar procedure in Canada. One doctor recalls attending a lecture, while a member of the University of British Columbia's 2005 medical school class, given by Dr. Garson Romalis, a Vancouver obstetrician (Romalis, who on two separate occasions has been shot and stabbed by anti-abortion activists, did not respond to repeated interview requests). "He said that actually he does do it, although some [doctors] don't," the student says. "And his reason was, and I'm paraphrasing, not quoting, him, that usually it is people from different cultures than his own and he feels it would be insulting to their culture if he said he wouldn't do it." He said, "even if he totally doesn't understand their way of thinking, it is a cultural thing, so he feels obliged to do that for them."

---

That explains a lot.

[ 16 June 2006: Message edited by: M. Spector ]

And frankly, part of it being MY BODY is that I should be able to have any information I want about what's growing inside me.

Michelle, so because certain people don't think girls should be born, they should just be allowed to abort them for that reason alone? Not because, they're young, poor, or not ready or able to be pregnant or have a baby -but for the simple reason that they want to be pregnant with a boy?

I support a policy of not revealing the baby's sex. PEI has such a policy and I don't think it infringes on a woman's rights.

horrendous, absolutely horrible. Who in the world would think that a female child was less important than our male counterparts? Ring, Ring -- hold the phone...'hello? where do you get the idea that male children are more valuable than female children? Where do you think that we all came from?' Oh yea, I forgot. The stork, of course.(!) We all know that women are inferior to men. Don't we?

This reminds me of my X's two little girls; they were the 'ice breaker' between his wife and me, with whom I had been fueding with for years and it had apparently been hurting no one except for my son. (Can't remember now what the original feud had been all about -- I think just that we didn't like each other for some reason; it didn't matter anymore. I'd have to say without a doubt that this had been an eye-opener; to say the least.

At the same time when I did receive the news from the amniocentesis that I had my OB/GYN perform; while I was carrying my child about four and half weeks from when I had known that I was pregnant; Still I wouldn't have given a thought as to whether I would abort her, rest up a few months and then try again for a boy. I have been blessed with a boy; and all mom's who have male children know what that means. Female children too; how could they be different...how could they be not wanted? I myself am a female and I'm so proud to be female! On various occasions in my life I've wanted to stand on top of a float in a parade and shoult out about how much I love my kids; LOVE being female; I also have gay couples who have had children naturally (with the women that I know, one was artifically ensemenated TWICE and I've never seen a happier family...the FOUR of them!) I think that these kids are lucky to have parents who love them so much. (these two little girls who are now part of my life; (my son's stepsisters) they raise their hands up to for me to give me a kiss whenever I stop by to pick up my son). They are absolutely precious; "A" (the three year) old was the real ice-breaker. Since then, I want to buy her things; get her cute little outfits; she is so precious. I'm just making my point here; I'm reeling with the fact that based on the sex of a child would be whether or not they would be born.

Let's hear it for being female!

I posted what I did from a feminist perspective, worried about less and less women in certain communities. I am pro-legal abortion and would never support going back to the times of hangers and back alleys. But sex-selective abortion is a serious issue.

The idea of being allowed to learn the sex, once it's too late for an abortion is a good one. That would allow time to plan, imagine names, etc.

quote:

---

Originally posted by EmmaG:
Michelle, so because certain people don't think girls should be born, they should just be allowed to abort them for that reason alone?

---

Yep. Their body, their choice. Any reason at all. Abortion on demand should be just that. No one should have to justify their reasons. And the fact that, at least here in Canada, it's possible to find out the sex of the baby, and yet we don't have some crazy difference between girls and boys being born shows that this is a non-issue. Unless, of course, you're a pro-lifer, looking for a wedge hot-button issue to try to divide pro-choicers. I refuse to be baited on that. I don't give a damn whether a woman decides to abort her fetus because she thinks her pregnant stomach doesn't match her new shoes. Her body, her choice.

[ 17 June 2006: Message edited by: Michelle ]

If it's not a life, if it's a woman's body, and if it's her choice then...it's her choice. Can't have it both ways.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Andy (Andrew):
I agree with Michelle that if you are pro-choice you are pro-choice even when the reason offends you.

---

I agree as well. I also agree that it's an anti-abortion ploy to play up the instances of both "frivolous" and sexist reasons. I wonder why these same factions don't get up in arms about fathers not paying child support

quote:

---

such as why do certain communities not value women in the first place?

---

[ 18 June 2006: Message edited by: bigcitygal ]

I'm pro-choice. I'm just saying the idea of sex-selective abortion is something I'm not comfortable with and I don't want to fund. How to you devise a policy around something like that, I don't know. I guess people would just not say their reasoning for wanting the abortion.

By communities, I was referring to certain statistics about the Chinese and Indian communities, indicating that the male/female ratio is larger than the general Canadian population. This is by no means proven fact, but in India and China, sex-selective abortion has become a real problem and their respective governments have begun trying to find ways to deal with this.

quote:

---

Originally posted by EmmaG:
Well, if someone wants to get an abortion because their pregnant belly doesn't match their shoes, I liken that more with plastic-surgery type of healthcare, and it shouldn't be publicly funded.
Same with sexist abortions, I don't want to fund a family's desire to terminate all their female fetuses.

---

So here the real vicious aim is revealed. Some health care provider would be mandated to determine the woman's "motive" in seeking an abortion. If she failed the polygraph or psychoanalytic test -- she gets a bill for the procedure.

quote:

---

Originally posted by EmmaG:

By communities, I was referring to certain statistics about the Chinese and Indian communities, indicating that the male/female ratio is larger than the general Canadian population. This is by no means proven fact, but in India and China, sex-selective abortion has become a real problem and their respective governments have begun trying to find ways to deal with this.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EmmaG:
By communities, I was referring to certain statistics about the Chinese and Indian communities, indicating that the male/female ratio is larger than the general Canadian population.

---

Have you a reputable source for any such statistics, EmmaG?

quote:

---

This is by no means proven fact...

---

The reason I'm willing to give Emma that point is because it still has exactly nothing to do with Canada, where we do not have draconian laws forbidding women from reproducing, and where families are not required to pay through the nose to ensure their daughters a socially "respectable" life through marriage. So there is no reason to freak out over sex selection here, because it's been possible to engage in sex selection for years in Canada through commonly available ultrasounds and that kind of disparity between the sexes hasn't happened - in fact, if anything, aren't there actually more women than men in Canada, by some small amount? 51%-49%? Not sure if that's still true.

So, this is a non-issue, at least here in Canada. I'm not interested in discussing policy as it pertains to other countries.

[ 18 June 2006: Message edited by: Michelle ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
... in fact, if anything, aren't there actually more women than men in Canada, by some small amount? 51%-49%? Not sure if that's still true.

---

Thinking of the fetus as something other than a shoe accessary, as proported by Michelle, might also help to achieve the same result.

"My concern is that abortion and birth control rights are being 'anti-marketed' to society.
adoption is being strongly pushed in our region and the anti-choice bunch has things like the 'sanctity of life' protests and the 'chain of life' day. it's making even the non religious young girls feel bad."

We live in an open society where debate is allowed. The fact is that not everyone agrees that we need to offer marketing deals on abortion - two-for-one perhaps, or a free pair of shoes to go with your new look? To use your imagery, pro-and-anti-abortion people alike are part of a larger 'marketplace' of ideas, and both have something for sale.

"I've written local pieces about this indoctrination of fear and guilt in our town but although i get many women who will bless me privately for sticking my neck out, nobody else will speak up in any public way."

You're right. Those anti-choicers are the only ones getting any positive attention in the media. Ha. 'Sticking your neck out?' Get real.

[ 19 June 2006: Message edited by: maidenhead ]

quote:

---

There’s a new front in the battle for abortion rights—the literal front, that is, of a t-shirt designed by writer and feminist activist Jennifer Baumgardner that proclaims “I had an abortion.” The shirt, initially for sale on Planned Parenthood’s national website and now available on Clamor magazine’s website, has generated controversy among not only the antiabortion community but also pro-choice feminists.

Full Frontal Offense

---

Also: The A-word

This from a recent National Post article: "According to data analysis, Surrey is just one part of the country that exhibits a significant deviation in the standard boy-girl ratio. Further evidence, including interviews with doctors and clinic workers, suggests a plausible reason: sex-selection abortions. Canadians are deliberately terminating pregnancies where a girl is expected, in hopes of having boys.

Extrapolation from Statistics Canada census data reveals that in several areas highly populated by immigrants from India and China, the gender ratios are often out of proportion. Boys and girls aren't supposed to be born with equal frequency, of course. Mother Nature accounts for the higher male mortality rate by producing, under normal circumstances, 105 boys for every 100 girls. But in Surrey, where the total population of nearly 350,000 includes 114,725 immigrants --35,380 of whom are from India -- the number is dramatically different. In 2003, instead of 105 boys to every girl, there were 109. In 2000, it was nearly 111; in 1999, 107; and in 1998, 110."

The two sides of this issue will never be able to talk to each other, so yes, both sides will always think that the other is propograting lies and propoganda. You think the same of each other - kind of a shame.

"'discussion' is not attempting to force everyone else to conform to anti-choice decisions."

Again, we live in a country where people don't all have to conform to the same view points. I'm pro-choice, but I must admit to not agreeing that a woman should make such a decision on whether to have an abortion because a flat tummy would go better with her slingbacks.

"'Discussion' is not the contrived little guilt trip that the anti-choice bunch are so willing to saddle young women with."

Again, they are starting with the proposition that a fetus is life, so they use the same tactics as pro-animal rights groups. I understand why you don't agree with their message, but surely you agree with the right to express it?

"You may have missed it, but women of all ages are becoming more and more reticent to discuss abortion openly and honestly. there are of course the showoffs and self flagelating whingers who get plenty of press[especially when they've been 'saved']"

You may have missed it, but I just looked it up and Stats Canada reports that 105,154 abortions took place in 2002, so, I think that the word is out on the street that it's available, whether or not they're willing to walk in a be-proud-of-your-abortion parade.

"Few women are defending abortion personally although the right to choose is still discussed."

quote:

---

Woman have the choice in Canada, but those who don't agree have the right to voice that opposition.

---

Not in the feminism forum of babble, they don't. This has been hashed out over the years here. I don't see why we're obliged to hash it out again.

This is a pro-feminist space. We have come to the conclusion that this means it's pro-choice. Period. If you want to see why and how this understanding has been reached, the onus is on you to go through past threads, not on us to ratchet back to the status quo of the 1950s and step delicately through feminism 101.

If you want to post anti-choice opinions and thought, there is a whole world of other discussion forums to visit and post to. And please, don't feel it's on you to open our eyes to the world of anti-choice thought. It's kind of easy to track down.

Many thanks for what you wrote, morningstar.

Canadian references that might be of interest:

prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org

No Choice: Canadian Women Tell Their Stories of Illegal Abortion

[ 19 June 2006: Message edited by: writer ]

quote:

---

...adoption is being strongly pushed in our region...

---

I don't think it's just your region. There is a mindset (with increasing legislative clout) out there that puts me in mind of "The Handmaid's Tale" -- women who are forced to bear a child for someone else if they're not ready or willing to raise a child. Way too much of this goes on already and some of that's due to the stigma attached to abortion, some of it's due to the lack of adequate access.

Born in America, adopted abroad

"Not in the feminism forum of babble, they don't. This has been hashed out over the years here. I don't see why we're obliged to hash it out again."

Putting aside Babble's definition of 'feminism' I have not argued the pro-choice stance, I have already stated that I'm pro-choice. In my post I was simply pointing out that we live in a free society - out there, in the real world..Canada - pro-lifers are allowed to expressed their opinion. If free debate weren't allowed, we wouldn't be living in a pro-choice state. RIGHT?

"This is a pro-feminist space. We have come to the conclusion that this means it's pro-choice. Period. If you want to see why and how this understanding has been reached, the onus is on you to go through past threads, not on us to ratchet back to the status quo of the 1950s and step delicately through feminism 101."

Not that I want to, but just generally speaking isn't is a little contractory for a self-proclaimed 'progressive' site to not allow new members to challenge the status quo?

"If you want to post anti-choice opinions and thought, there is a whole world of other discussion forums to visit and post to. And please, don't feel it's on you to open our eyes to the world of anti-choice thought. It's kind of easy to track down."

I don't. That's pretty clear if you would take a momemnt and re-read my post. But, thanks for the explanation.

[ 19 June 2006: Message edited by: maidenhead ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by maidenhead:
I wrote: Woman have the choice in Canada, but those who don't agree have the right to voice that opposition. If opposition weren't allowed, the laws would never have been changed to their current pro-choice state...would they?

---

The laws were changed after many years of open defiance (through illegal clinics -- I contributed to the Morgentaler Clinic in Montreal in the late 60s before it dared have a sign out front), combined with mass mobilization spearheaded by women, and facing persecution and intimidation in families, neighbourhoods, religious institutions, schools, wherever the status quo was being challenged.

The only sense in which opposition was "allowed" was that they couldn't lock you up or shoot you for just saying you opposed the law. They had to find other pretexts.

And today, you can still get bombed or shot at for delivering what is now a legal service to women.

So I'll have to beg to differ with your view that being "progressive" means allowing people the freedom of speech to preach re-enslavement of women on this board.

Freedom of speech is a fundamental right in any progressive society. Period. And pointing fingers at negative actions that others have taken to justify your own lack of progressive thought is the surest way to slippery slide down into creating a society that reflects the worst, not the best, of humankind.

Just my opinion.

[ 20 June 2006: Message edited by: maidenhead ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by maidenhead:
Freedom of speech is a fundamental right in any progressive society. Period.

---

That's right. And part of the freedom of speech means that individual web sites are not obligated to publish points of view contrary to their own mandate. People not being allowed to spout anti-choice crap on babble is not denying people their freedom of speech. There are lots of other places on the internet and in Canada where you can spout anti-choice rhetoric. We have absolutely no obligation to publish it here.

I haven't spouted anything of the kind. If I have, please point it out.

I" would like this thread drift to end here and now. You do not get to dictate the mandate of this board or the posting rules, maidenhead, and you're just sidetracking this thread with your insinuations that the people posting here are against freedom of speech."

I'm not 'side tracking' the thread, I merely disagreed with originator's perspective regading the need to more positively 'market' abortions. The 'sidetracking' has been done by others who have decided to latch onto one thing I said - wherein I was pointing out that out there, in the real world opposing views are allowed on this subject, not babble - about the right to freedom of speech.

My other line of input was directed towards your assumption that gender selection as the cause of abortions was not an issue in Canada, when it would appear that it might well be - and if it is, that's a problem unless we view China as the nation we're looking to follow on this issue. Should you wish to bring this back on track and respond, that would be great.

[ 20 June 2006: Message edited by: maidenhead ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by maidenhead:
I haven't spouted anything of the kind. If I have, please point it out.

---

I didn't say you did. I'm asking you to stop sidetracking with discussions about whether they should be able to do so here or not.

quote:

---

i'm hearing murmurs of 'not enough nice [white] babies available for adoption' where i live although it's said in much more meally mouthed ways.

---

Choose the sex of your baby

On abortion generally, I think the point in the pregnancy matters. Early in the term, I feel the way Michelle does -- complete abortion on demand, no questions asked. As the fetal brain develops and the procedure becomes riskier and causes physical pain to another creature, I think there should be a darn good reason.

[ 22 June 2006: Message edited by: Farces ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Farces:
Article on sex selection abortion that is making the rounds (discusses Canada somewhat):

Choose the sex of your baby

On abortion generally, I think the point in the pregnancy matters. Early in the term, I feel the way Michelle does -- complete abortion on demand, no questions asked. As the fetal brain develops and the procedure becomes riskier and causes physical pain to another creature, I think there should be a darn good reason.

---

I don't know what "rounds" this article is making, but in the link you provided, the article is unsigned and unattributed, and it quotes some looney Americans with a Dr. title saying: "The Chinese like boys. Canadians like girls." -- suggesting Canadians come to the U.S. to abort male foetuses? Or what?

As for your requirement of a "darn good reason" for abortion at some undefined point in foetal development, what did you have in mind: Rape victims only? Life-threatening issues?

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:

I don't know what "rounds" this article is making . . .

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Farces:

Answer

---

Thanks for the links, Farces. This whole crap obviously started with one nutbar ("Dr." Jeffrey Steinberg), was picked up by a desperate AP reporter (Carla Johnson), and then was a one-day wonder in the world media. There wasn't even a survey done -- just a quote by this weirdo:

quote:

---

But one doctor who offers embryo selection for about $20,000 (U.S.) says he is serving the marketplace and helping Nature, not playing God. People will be less alarmed as sex selection becomes more routine, said Dr. Jeffrey Steinberg of the Fertility Institutes of Los Angeles and Las Vegas.

"It's new. It's scary. We understand that," he said. And the only country outpacing China's interest in the sex-selection procedure is Canada.

"The Chinese like boys. Canadians like girls. Every country is different," said Steinberg, adding the boy-girl preference balances out at 50-50 when clients are added together.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
. . .There wasn't even a survey done . . .

---

You have kept asking the question about how we can educate our young people about how to go about the process of implementing birth control and carrying it through to the abortion issue; as a pro-choice advocate my only answer as I scratch my head is just education, I guess. Get 'em while they're young...like really young. Get rid of those stupid sex education tapes that are outdated and bring the issues up to the times we are living in. Be candid with young people who ask questions BEFORE they become sexually active. Or give them an arena with which this could become possible. Give them permission to talk about it before they get into trouble. Surely someone might agree with this; in short of reminding anyone about the 'overnight abortion pill'-- I think that whoever developed this pill must have believed in pro-choice; but I believe that in any instance whether you take that pill or abort a fetus in about six weeks gestation there is confusion and mad debates regarding whether it is the same thing or not; I don't want to even go there but I did bring it up. And the fact that somebody developed this pill is more than a coincidence in giving women options,imo...) But for some reason I dislike the idea because it seems to have been developed to totally take away any consequences that might come from this sort of thing. I do not believe that any action comes without consequences; as those of us who have spoken frankly about abortion in this thread might attest to. As a matter of fact, I think that is the whole reason that this thread was brought up; to allow those of us who feel brave enough to speak about it tune in and talk about something that has been a heavy weight on our backs for some years and years. That's what I mean about consequences; but when I bring that up at the same time I also bring up forgiveness; which I believe every woman is allowed to be forgiven. I guess I believe this because I haven't met any perfect people, yet. Anway;

I believe that young adolescents before becoming sexually active should be completely educated on the consequences of having unprotected sex and should all spend some time thinking of what they would do if they found themselves in this predicament.

Other than that; I can't think of anything else that we could do to help other women facing this sort of dilemna, Morningstar. I'm still giving it some thought though... I also agree with those who mentioned to "talk straight"...that has been my intention and I hope that I have. I have issues with this subject matter; and that's why I feel passionately about it.

In my case, I talk to my kid all the time about any of the things that he brings up and wants to know about. This includes sex too. And he has so many questions, and imo so much to learn. I can't educate him enough about how to be safe; be aware; practice safe sex when it is TIME for him to have sex; he is only approaching adolescence now and is kind of left behind the others in his class so I just let him approach the subject matter at his own pace. Although he is thinking of girls all the time; I stress to him alot that I will always be there for him to help him through any kind of crisis or any questions that he has for me to answer. I would rather be there for him to ask me first, than for him to stumble through his first experimental sexual experiences and only to find that he hadn't been armed with information beforehand; and finds himself in trouble. I talk to him all the time.

So my answer -- education. Mammas, don't let your babies grow up to be daddies! (Especially at age 15, ect.)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:

Yep. Their body, their choice. Any reason at all. Abortion on demand should be just that. No one should have to justify their reasons. And the fact that, at least here in Canada, it's possible to find out the sex of the baby, and yet we don't have some crazy difference between girls and boys being born shows that this is a non-issue. Unless, of course, you're a pro-lifer, looking for a wedge hot-button issue to try to divide pro-choicers. I refuse to be baited on that. I don't give a damn whether a woman decides to abort her fetus because she thinks her pregnant stomach doesn't match her new shoes. Her body, her choice.

[ 17 June 2006: Message edited by: Michelle ]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MinorityReport:

Ever heard of the saying see no evil?it's funny how all you femminazis can glorify state sanctioned infanticide.
abortion is murder prettied up and married off as"A womans right to choose"
Abortion is not a means of birth control,if you aren't prepared to take on the responsibility of caring for a child then grow the hell up. When did it become morally right for a doctor to blindly rip apart a baby's body limb, by limb? And that is how it happens. Maybe you should try having it done to you , ya think it would feel good? I don't think so.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MinorityReport:
No thanks I think I'll stay here

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
Message has gone to moderator.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil_Pancake_Man:
Svend is that you?Where can a fella get some hot jewellery?

---

God and this thread was coming along fine; I had actually felt better having talked a little bit about things like this.