NationStates Jolt Archive

Hey guys. I recently saw a post that complained about the lack of well thought out topics in general, byu someone I can't remember. So, I decided to throw up my latest editorial to hopefully get something going.

**********************************************************
Abortion This, Abortion That
07/14/2004
by Brian Kozina



I’ve been thinking a lot lately about how much arguing goes on inthe world about issues that could have a solution pleasing to most everyone but the most extreme of each side. I believe abortion to be one of those issues. Before I get started on the actual article, I’d like to say a few things.

1) Not every woman who has or wants an abortion is a whore. Similarly, not every woman who has or wants an abortion is a “stupid bitch who didn’t use protection.” Condoms, birth control pills, and other methods of birth control can and do fail. Some people are raped or victims of incest. Some young women are tricked into having unprotected sex with someone who wants a quick fuck and then deserts them. You have no right to make those people pay such a high price for a fleeting moment of ignorance or to make them pay for being the victim of some subhuman creature looking to prey on an innocent.

2) Pro-choice does not equal pro-abortion. Pro-choice simply means wanting the choice to exist if needed or desired. I know many individuals that are pro-choice who would never have an abortion, but believe it to be the woman’s prerogative to decide one way or the other.

3) Abortion is neither an issue of fetus rights or women’s rights It’s an issue of human rights. The problem is, we currently have no way of knowing when, in fact, a fetus is fit to be classified as a human. But doesn’t the possibility that we even might be killing one of our own deserve at least some consideration?

4) Pro-lifers who can only form an opinion based on showing people pictures of an aborted fetus should not be allowed to debate the issue - period. The pictures are gross, disgusting, extremely graphic, and they make ones emotions riled up to the point where they cannot make an informed choice on what to wear that day, let alone on abortion. Now, you may say “Well, then why do you support abortion if they are so bad?” The answer is that those pictures prove absolutely nothing but the fact that the person using them has little or no brainpower to form a coherent argument. I would have the same reaction to a picture of someone holding a freshly removed human heart, or a picture of someone on the operating table with their chest sliced open. I have heard very few pro-life arguments that are based on any kind of scientific data whatsoever. Instead they resort to “shock value” or in extreme cases, blowing up abortion clinics to get their “point” across.

5) Pro-choicers who scream at the top of their lungs that a fetus is not a human being piss me off to no end. Likewise, pro-lifers who scream at the top of their lungs that a fetus is a human being piss me off to no end. Sit down, shut up, and realize that we do not have the knowledge to make either assumption at this time.

6) Female pro-choicers who say that men should not be able to speak their mind on the subject of abortion simply because they do not have a uterus should have their ass kicked. My penis has no bearing on my thinking on the subject, and if you were to implant me with your uterus I’d have the exact same opinions I do right now, because there is only one truth about the matter, and that is the bold text in item #5. Likewise, female pro-choicers who say that men should not be able to speak their mind on the subject of abortion simply because they do not have a uterus, and then say that any man who is pro-life is a sexist pig trying to stamp out women’s rights should have their ass kicked.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Now that we’ve gotten that out of the way, I shall proceed with my article, and give you…


THE ABORTION COMPROMISE!!!

*crash of thunder followed by maniacal laughter*

*ahem*

Abortion itself would be legal. However, the following restrictions would apply:

a) Partial-birth abortions are banned. In addition, abortions shall only be performed during the first 90 days of a pregnancy. This shall be, because although we do not currently have data to determine human status, the first 90 days of a pregnancy does not see much development of vital organs or human systems. Also, partial birth abortions are performed after the nervous system, brain, and all other organs have developed, and evidence (and also common sense) suggests that the transition from fetus to human would be complete by this time.

b) Women who want abortions are free to get one abortion without explanation in their lifetime, and records would be kept of when it was, who it was, and who performed the abortion. The odds of the same woman being raped twice are almost null, as is the odds of the same couple using defective birth control twice. Also, if you didn’t learn from your first mistake of not using protection, well, sucks to be you. An exception to this rule will be made only in the cases of multiple rapes, and cause must be shown upon preponderance of evidence that multiple rapes have actually occurred. Police reporting is the most viable option, but a physical by a medical professional will also suffice. A woman’s first abortion, which is shown to be caused by rape, shall not count against her one guaranteed abortion.

c) The most humane procedure currently used for abortions shall be the only procedure used, unless it somehow puts the woman in jeopardy or a more humane procedure is developed.

d) A significant amount of funding shall be devoted to answering the question of when a human fetus is indeed fit to be classified as a human being. Likewise, funding for programs with promote the use of birth control and abstinence shall remain at current levels, so as to make all attempts to diminish the need for abortions. In addition, there shall exist some form of “sexual responsibility” class, which shows people in the age group that is most likely to get abortions the various methods of birth control and the proper ways to use them, along with teaching them the benefits of abstinence.

e) Abortions shall be performed by government certified medical professionals only. This will better allow the government to keep track of abortions, and who receives them. The government would not be condoning abortion, but rather making it safer and better regulated. There shall be no cost for certification.

**********************************************************
So that’s all I can come up with right now. I’m just so tired of seeing abortion glorified as some liberation tactic or abused as a form of birth control, that I had to put in my two cents. I hope this doesn’t get me killed by my fellow liberals.

So, whatcha think?

THE CANALES AMENDMENT


Section 1: Congress shall make no laws favoring or prohibiting abortion.

Section 2: Congress shall neither fund nor withhold funding from states or individuals on the basis of whether they support or oppose abortion.

Section 3: The President and his cabinet shall neither issue nor enforce any laws or regulations regarding participation by any American citizen in the abortion procedure.

Section 4: The states shall have the power to enact and enforce any and all necessary laws encouraging or restricting abortion within their borders, as shall seem to them to be in their best interests.

Section 5: This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in three-fourths of the states, within one hundred years from the date of the submission hereof to the states by the Congress.

from an unfinished website.

Hey guys. I recently saw a post that complained about the lack of well thought out topics in general, byu someone I can't remember. So, I decided to throw up my latest editorial to hopefully get something going.

**********************************************************
Abortion This, Abortion That
07/14/2004
by Brian Kozina



I’ve been thinking a lot lately about how much arguing goes on inthe world about issues that could have a solution pleasing to most everyone but the most extreme of each side. I believe abortion to be one of those issues. Before I get started on the actual article, I’d like to say a few things.

1) Not every woman who has or wants an abortion is a whore. Similarly, not every woman who has or wants an abortion is a “stupid bitch who didn’t use protection.” Condoms, birth control pills, and other methods of birth control can and do fail. Some people are raped or victims of incest. Some young women are tricked into having unprotected sex with someone who wants a quick fuck and then deserts them. You have no right to make those people pay such a high price for a fleeting moment of ignorance or to make them pay for being the victim of some subhuman creature looking to prey on an innocent.

2) Pro-choice does not equal pro-abortion. Pro-choice simply means wanting the choice to exist if needed or desired. I know many individuals that are pro-choice who would never have an abortion, but believe it to be the woman’s prerogative to decide one way or the other.

3) Abortion is neither an issue of fetus rights or women’s rights It’s an issue of human rights. The problem is, we currently have no way of knowing when, in fact, a fetus is fit to be classified as a human. But doesn’t the possibility that we even might be killing one of our own deserve at least some consideration?

4) Pro-lifers who can only form an opinion based on showing people pictures of an aborted fetus should not be allowed to debate the issue - period. The pictures are gross, disgusting, extremely graphic, and they make ones emotions riled up to the point where they cannot make an informed choice on what to wear that day, let alone on abortion. Now, you may say “Well, then why do you support abortion if they are so bad?” The answer is that those pictures prove absolutely nothing but the fact that the person using them has little or no brainpower to form a coherent argument. I would have the same reaction to a picture of someone holding a freshly removed human heart, or a picture of someone on the operating table with their chest sliced open. I have heard very few pro-life arguments that are based on any kind of scientific data whatsoever. Instead they resort to “shock value” or in extreme cases, blowing up abortion clinics to get their “point” across.

5) Pro-choicers who scream at the top of their lungs that a fetus is not a human being piss me off to no end. Likewise, pro-lifers who scream at the top of their lungs that a fetus is a human being piss me off to no end. Sit down, shut up, and realize that we do not have the knowledge to make either assumption at this time.

6) Female pro-choicers who say that men should not be able to speak their mind on the subject of abortion simply because they do not have a uterus should have their ass kicked. My penis has no bearing on my thinking on the subject, and if you were to implant me with your uterus I’d have the exact same opinions I do right now, because there is only one truth about the matter, and that is the bold text in item #5. Likewise, female pro-choicers who say that men should not be able to speak their mind on the subject of abortion simply because they do not have a uterus, and then say that any man who is pro-life is a sexist pig trying to stamp out women’s rights should have their ass kicked.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Now that we’ve gotten that out of the way, I shall proceed with my article, and give you…


THE ABORTION COMPROMISE!!!

*crash of thunder followed by maniacal laughter*

*ahem*

Abortion itself would be legal. However, the following restrictions would apply:

a) Partial-birth abortions are banned. In addition, abortions shall only be performed during the first 90 days of a pregnancy. This shall be, because although we do not currently have data to determine human status, the first 90 days of a pregnancy does not see much development of vital organs or human systems. Also, partial birth abortions are performed after the nervous system, brain, and all other organs have developed, and evidence (and also common sense) suggests that the transition from fetus to human would be complete by this time.

b) Women who want abortions are free to get one abortion without explanation in their lifetime, and records would be kept of when it was, who it was, and who performed the abortion. The odds of the same woman being raped twice are almost null, as is the odds of the same couple using defective birth control twice. Also, if you didn’t learn from your first mistake of not using protection, well, sucks to be you. An exception to this rule will be made only in the cases of multiple rapes, and cause must be shown upon preponderance of evidence that multiple rapes have actually occurred. Police reporting is the most viable option, but a physical by a medical professional will also suffice. A woman’s first abortion, which is shown to be caused by rape, shall not count against her one guaranteed abortion.

c) The most humane procedure currently used for abortions shall be the only procedure used, unless it somehow puts the woman in jeopardy or a more humane procedure is developed.

d) A significant amount of funding shall be devoted to answering the question of when a human fetus is indeed fit to be classified as a human being. Likewise, funding for programs with promote the use of birth control and abstinence shall remain at current levels, so as to make all attempts to diminish the need for abortions. In addition, there shall exist some form of “sexual responsibility” class, which shows people in the age group that is most likely to get abortions the various methods of birth control and the proper ways to use them, along with teaching them the benefits of abstinence.

e) Abortions shall be performed by government certified medical professionals only. This will better allow the government to keep track of abortions, and who receives them. The government would not be condoning abortion, but rather making it safer and better regulated. There shall be no cost for certification.

**********************************************************
So that’s all I can come up with right now. I’m just so tired of seeing abortion glorified as some liberation tactic or abused as a form of birth control, that I had to put in my two cents. I hope this doesn’t get me killed by my fellow liberals.

So, whatcha think?

We know when human life begins, we just need to figure out when personhood begins.

That's not much of a compromise--sounds like a nightmare to me. Record keeping of both patients and practitioners? And besides, some of your so-called compromises are part of the law anyway, specifically point e--abortion providers are already licensed medical professionals. They're called doctors.

Choice is just that--choice. Limiting the number of times and the reasons why a woman can terminate a pregnancy is not choice. And for the record, partial-birth abortion is a bullshit term made up by anti-abortionists. It's a medical procedure that is never done voluntarily and is done only in the extreme case where the life of the mother is directly threatened and/or the fetus is not viable.

Here's a compromise for you. We'll increase funding to sex-education, start providing access to RU-486 and the morning after pill, and encourage women not to have abortions. In the meantime, we'll keep first trimester abortions legal, and we'll try to fnd ways to continue to reduce the number performed that don't involve restrictions on choice.

Intresting.

Question: What about life ending dieseases? My wife has a very nasty version of Cystic Fibrosis. She lost a sister and we lost a child to it.

The diesease requires teams of doctors for breathing and eating. Constant attention etc. Succesful life to teenager years is now %30.

Genetic testing takes a long time to sequence the genes. It pushes the limits to the partial birth time period.

What about horrible dieases like downs?

Is the quality of life improved for living CF and downs children by having more of them?

Abortion is not simply an unplanned pregnancy or cases of rape or incest.....

We are still learning more about the development of the human fetus. It was only recently that nonbiased non political scientists announced they had discovered that life actually begins 3 days after conception.
It was also recently found that it is the woman's egg that determines if a fetus does end up with something like Cystic fybrosis, cause of how she lives her life long before she even gets pregnant, or if it ends miscarrying.
Women determine a lot about the future of their offspring, through their lifestyles up to 6 months before conception.
Its complicated, I'd have to get that issue of Discover for you cause it explains it better.

How about putting abortion in the same area as euthanasia, in terms of artificial life support termination. The fetus is, for the most part, reliant on the mother as a form of artificial life support. Like with vegetative state patients, shouldn't it be left to the nearest relative, i.e. the mother, to decide whether or not she wishes to terminate that life support, or 'pull the plug,' so to speak?

And an abortion is better than a child born to parents unprepared and untrained to care for them. Those are the kids that tend to repeat their parents mistakes.

If someone does not want a child, you cannot make them. All you'll end up with is the scenario my aunt is in - she has two kids she doesn't want, wasn't prepared for. She takes them to adult parties with sex, alcohol and drugs. They are both failing in school because my aunt has to move repeatedly because she cannot keep up with the bills associated with being a single mum. The elder cousin (7) is already totally unmanagable, is allowed to wear mini skirts and high heels, and is just an all around brat. All three, my aunt and two cousins, have a really shit life set out for them, because my aunt didn't take childbirth seriously.

Hell, you want to stop abortions? Get rid of Bush (sorry, but it's relevant). He's cutting funding to things left and right, and one of those things is sexual education in schools. He's also under pressure to announce that *condoms*, of all things, are not effective at preventing birth, and that 'abstinence' is the only answer.

-----
On the other hand, people who have 10+ abortions (not for medical reasons or rape) should be spayed.

We are still learning more about the development of the human fetus. It was only recently that nonbiased non political scientists announced they had discovered that life actually begins 3 days after conception.
It was also recently found that it is the woman's egg that determines if a fetus does end up with something like Cystic fybrosis, cause of how she lives her life long before she even gets pregnant, or if it ends miscarrying.
Women determine a lot about the future of their offspring, through their lifestyles up to 6 months before conception.
Its complicated, I'd have to get that issue of Discover for you cause it explains it better.

Do so please. CF is genetics. Both father and mother must be a carrier. Child has 25% change of being clean. 50% chance of being a carrier and 25% chance of having the disease.

... On the other hand, people who have 10+ abortions (not for medical reasons or rape) should be spayed.

On the topic of spaying, why not just have everyone temporarily sterilized once they reach puberty? We have the drugs for long term sterilization (4 years, I believe, in the form of an implant), we could just stick that in everyone. It would be more cost effective to just do one gender, but that would cause all kinds of discrimination problems, not to mention increasing the chance of 'critical failure' of the sterilant.

Once a person reaches an appropriate age, say 18, and can prove financial feasability and pass a parenting certification test, then the sterilant is no longer implanted in that person. How's that for a plan?

And an abortion is better than a child born to parents unprepared and untrained to care for them. Those are the kids that tend to repeat their parents mistakes.

If someone does not want a child, you cannot make them. All you'll end up with is the scenario my aunt is in - she has two kids she doesn't want, wasn't prepared for. She takes them to adult parties with sex, alcohol and drugs. They are both failing in school because my aunt has to move repeatedly because she cannot keep up with the bills associated with being a single mum. The elder cousin (7) is already totally unmanagable, is allowed to wear mini skirts and high heels, and is just an all around brat. All three, my aunt and two cousins, have a really shit life set out for them, because my aunt didn't take childbirth seriously.

Hell, you want to stop abortions? Get rid of Bush (sorry, but it's relevant). He's cutting funding to things left and right, and one of those things is sexual education in schools. He's also under pressure to announce that *condoms*, of all things, are not effective at preventing birth, and that 'abstinence' is the only answer.

-----
On the other hand, people who have 10+ abortions (not for medical reasons or rape) should be spayed.

That is not a valid reason for abortion.

On the topic of spaying, why not just have everyone temporarily sterilized once they reach puberty? We have the drugs for long term sterilization (4 years, I believe, in the form of an implant), we could just stick that in everyone. It would be more cost effective to just do one gender, but that would cause all kinds of discrimination problems, not to mention increasing the chance of 'critical failure' of the sterilant.

Once a person reaches an appropriate age, say 18, and can prove financial feasability and pass a parenting certification test, then the sterilant is no longer implanted in that person. How's that for a plan?


dude, your a genius.........that is a fantastic plan....except for the parenting cert....who/which catigory of society would set the standard? otherwise this would be a great way of stopping the poor from breeding.

On the topic of spaying, why not just have everyone temporarily sterilized once they reach puberty? We have the drugs for long term sterilization (4 years, I believe, in the form of an implant), we could just stick that in everyone. It would be more cost effective to just do one gender, but that would cause all kinds of discrimination problems, not to mention increasing the chance of 'critical failure' of the sterilant.

Once a person reaches an appropriate age, say 18, and can prove financial feasability and pass a parenting certification test, then the sterilant is no longer implanted in that person. How's that for a plan?
How about no. That's a gross violation of their natural God given right to free choice.
If you believe in free choice when it comes to abortion, then you have to also support free choice when it comes to temporary sterility.
Other wise you are not really pro choice.
And reproduction is also a god given right which no third party can abridge or take away. Requiring financial feasabillity and certification would be overturned by the Courts as an unconstitutional infringement on the rights of the people involved.

dude, your a genius.........that is a fantastic plan....except for the parenting cert....who/which catigory of society would set the standard? otherwise this would be a great way of stopping the poor from breeding.

;)

Well there are times I thought that certain people should have a license to breed. Just the other day I listened to a story where a woman was nailed for routinely leaving her 10 year old son at an amusement park.

It's provocative but it does open up the doors to master race garbage.

I am afraid you may be right about the Master race problem, even in the U.S. where we are all mongrels. Someone would surely decide someone else shouldn't breed.

As for gods given rights, they are not being taken away. You still have the right to choose. But, as with all choices, you must be willing to bear the consequences of those choices. In this case, if you should choose to somehow not participate, I imagine you would have to be jailed in interred with other offenders in some facility.

dude, your a genius.........that is a fantastic plan....except for the parenting cert....who/which catigory of society would set the standard? otherwise this would be a great way of stopping the poor from breeding.


I don't really see it as a way to prevent the poor from breeding (well, maybe the extremely poor), as economic feasibility would have to be simply the perceived ability to provide the basics of life (food, clothing, shelter) to you and a child. I see as more of a way to reduce the burden on welfare programs, allowing for redistribution of funds to other areas, such as education and health care.

I am afraid you may be right about the Master race problem, even in the U.S. where we are all mongrels. Someone would surely decide someone else shouldn't breed.

As for gods given rights, they are not being taken away. You still have the right to choose. But, as with all choices, you must be willing to bear the consequences of those choices. In this case, if you should choose to somehow not participate, I imagine you would have to be jailed in interred with other offenders in some facility.
but then that is not freedom of choice.
consequences do not naturally involve going to jail for having a child.
unless you live in a fascist dictatorship such as china where they don't have even human rights
I know of no parents who regretted the consequences of having there children.
Do you have to bear the consequences? yes
is having to go to jail one of those valid consequences, no.

Ah, but you are not going to jail for having a child, you are going to jail for violating the laws regarding when you had that child. So long as you choose to be a citizen of a country, you choose to submit yourself to the laws and customs of that country.

And as for jail being an unnatural consequence, jailing is a very natural consequence of violating the law. However, I would have to agree that, in the case of pregnancy, a special facility would be much better than a simple jail.

Ah, but you are not going to jail for having a child, you are going to jail for violating the laws regarding when you had that child. So long as you choose to be a citizen of a country, you choose to submit yourself to the laws and customs of that country.

And as for jail being an unnatural consequence, jailing is a very natural consequence of violating the law. However, I would have to agree that, in the case of pregnancy, a special facility would be much better than a simple jail.
ah, then you my friend would be advocating a dictatorship which fortunately will not happen in america.

No, I am not indicating any form of government. If the majority of people in a democracy should decide that such a law is appropriate, then it would be just as effective as in a dictatorship. And before you say unconstitutional, it only takes three fourths of the states to change that same constitution ( or a popular referendum, which then needs 2/3 or 3/4 of the population as a whole to vote for it). Democracy, Republic, Oligarchy, Dictatorship, Despotism, all of these are forms of governance, not ideologies.

No, I am not indicating any form of government. If the majority of people in a democracy should decide that such a law is appropriate, then it would be just as effective as in a dictatorship. And before you say unconstitutional, it only takes three fourths of the states to change that same constitution ( or a popular referendum, which then needs 2/3 or 3/4 of the population as a whole to vote for it). Democracy, Republic, Oligarchy, Dictatorship, Despotism, all of these are forms of governance, not ideologies.
still dictatorship, just because its by majority rule does not make it any less dictatorship
there is such a thing as dictatorship of the majority aka mob rule, or tyrranny by the majority.
the majority isn't always right.

still dictatorship, just because its by majority rule does not make it any less dictatorship
there is such a thing as dictatorship of the majority aka mob rule, or tyrranny by the majority.
the majority isn't always right.

I really think you need to go and look up Dictatorship in the encycopedia. And according to the U.S. Constitution (you are an American, aren't you) the majority is always right. Eventually, anyway.

I really think you need to go and look up Dictatorship in the encycopedia. And according to the U.S. Constitution (you are an American, aren't you) the majority is always right. Eventually, anyway.
no the majority is not always right. that is what the constitution says.
that is why it provides for something called the electoral college.
to overrule the people in case they try to elect some one who would do something like that.
the constitution has many safe guards against the majority abusing the rights of the minority.

Can we use correct English please? I know you Americans enjoy corrupting words so they're easier to spell, and that's all good and well, but if we're using medical terminology, please use the word 'foetus', not 'fetus'. Mainly because 'fetus' should be pronounced 'fet-us', and 'foetus' should be pronounced 'fee-tus'.

Fetus is fee-tus, while foetus should be fow-tus. Or so standard phonics would tell us.

And an abortion is better than a child born to parents unprepared and untrained to care for them. Those are the kids that tend to repeat their parents mistakes.

If someone does not want a child, you cannot make them. All you'll end up with is the scenario my aunt is in - she has two kids she doesn't want, wasn't prepared for. She takes them to adult parties with sex, alcohol and drugs. They are both failing in school because my aunt has to move repeatedly because she cannot keep up with the bills associated with being a single mum. The elder cousin (7) is already totally unmanagable, is allowed to wear mini skirts and high heels, and is just an all around brat. All three, my aunt and two cousins, have a really shit life set out for them, because my aunt didn't take childbirth seriously.

Hell, you want to stop abortions? Get rid of Bush (sorry, but it's relevant). He's cutting funding to things left and right, and one of those things is sexual education in schools. He's also under pressure to announce that *condoms*, of all things, are not effective at preventing birth, and that 'abstinence' is the only answer.

-----
On the other hand, people who have 10+ abortions (not for medical reasons or rape) should be spayed.


Please...getting rid of Bush wont' solve the problem..we've had sex education on the books for the better part of 30 yrs...we've had Public Announcements on everything from television to small movies shown in schools..and condoms are not that effective...they break....even so much as a small undetected hole will still risk the chance of pregnancy....Nothing is working on convincing children that you shouldn't have unprotected sex..hell not have sex period. Abstinence while perhaps a pipe dream is the only 100% effective method of birth control..perhaps if we concentrated on bringing back some damn sense of personal responsibility for your actions to kids then mebbe they'd not act like bunny rabbits whenever they get a itch to scratch.

Maybe if we get the media to stop pumping the message "Sex is what makes you a worthwhile human being" into the teen markets, teens would stop having random wild orgies (and yes, teen orgies are on the rise, not to mention the pre-teens).

Abstinance is good, don't get me wrong, but it's not 100% simply because people in this day and age *aren't* willing to abstain until marriage (not all of them anyway).

And sex ed in school currently is bullshit. It's the mechanics, and none of the consequences. You want to stop teens having sex? Show the guys nice glossy, 10" x 10" photos of the effects of STDs - they may not give a fuck about the pre-teen pussy they're getting, but they sure as hell won't want herpes or pussy genital warts. Make the girls carry around those dolls that cry randomly, and make them carry them around for a month. Hand out condoms, teach the girls that sex isn't nearly as great as it's hyped up to be (not when it's done with some sloppy teenage jerk anyway), and beat it into them that sex leads to shit if it's not respected.

And I'm sorry, but Bush is part of the problem. Getting rid of him won't *fix* the problem (I'm not an idiot, thank you), and heck, the next president may very well make things worse for all I know - but Bush is still part of the problem.

america as a country needs to retain some semblance of legal abortions because, as soon as we ban it and say "no doctors will help you with your problem!" the women go "underground" and end up getting back alley abortions with coat hangers or acid and usually end up dead in the process.

Maybe if we get the media to stop pumping the message "Sex is what makes you a worthwhile human being" into the teen markets, teens would stop having random wild orgies (and yes, teen orgies are on the rise, not to mention the pre-teens).

Abstinance is good, don't get me wrong, but it's not 100% simply because people in this day and age *aren't* willing to abstain until marriage (not all of them anyway).

And sex ed in school currently is bullshit. It's the mechanics, and none of the consequences. You want to stop teens having sex? Show the guys nice glossy, 10" x 10" photos of the effects of STDs - they may not give a fuck about the pre-teen pussy they're getting, but they sure as hell won't want herpes or pussy genital warts. Make the girls carry around those dolls that cry randomly, and make them carry them around for a month. Hand out condoms, teach the girls that sex isn't nearly as great as it's hyped up to be (not when it's done with some sloppy teenage jerk anyway), and beat it into them that sex leads to shit if it's not respected.

And I'm sorry, but Bush is part of the problem. Getting rid of him won't *fix* the problem (I'm not an idiot, thank you), and heck, the next president may very well make things worse for all I know - but Bush is still part of the problem.

I'm sorry..but you just can't blame a President the lack of willpower or sense of today's youth...it's personal responsibility and it stops with the kid..no more.no less...you are responsible for your own choices..immature or not...not the President...condoms are still available..birth control pills can still be prescribed..when we stop blaming someone else for the choices we make then perhaps guys will stop wanting to snag a little and girls will stop seeing sex as a way to keep a guy or that by laying down with him everything will be rosy.

Um... if the president ends up saying "Condoms are not effective" and spreading that bullshit through schools, then yes, he is to blame.

As he is not, he isn't currently at fault. But I really, *really* wouldn't put it past him.

Comdoms are, at a conservative vote, about 98% effective. Bush is being pushed to announce they are *not at all* effective.