RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman

RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

LotusSong -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/30/2006 12:34:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy Michael J. Fox may be on that medication, but he may also be on a whole cocktail of drugs to quell the effects of the brain misfires. Just me, etc. Sinergy When I last saw my neurologist, I asked him if I would be at risk of getting Parkinson's someday. He told me that eventually EVERYONE gets it to a degree.

Level -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/30/2006 3:29:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle "Many millions of people oppose stem cell research because they believe they are defending human life. This is not a bad thing. " If it ain't THEIR LIFE, it ain't THEIR BUSINESS... I disagree.

Level -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/30/2006 3:31:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle "Generally a good statement, but when it comes to pregnancy, it's not just one body involved. " CORRECT! It's One Body ( the mothers ) and The Mother's PROPERTY RIGHTS in her creation. ( Absolute, btw... ) Unless you're some sort of Socialist or Commie who thinks The State has a greater claim upon the child... It's also the body of the child inside... you know, the one being eliminated.

leatherlord -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/30/2006 3:58:15 PM)
Q: What's the difference between Rush Limbaugh and the Hindenburg? A: One is a fat NAZI gasbag, and the other is a dirigible. (Not my joke, but quite funny. Sums up the POS, in my opinion. Maybe they'll actually put his sorry ass in jail the next time he gets caught with drugs that aren't his.)

nefertari -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/30/2006 4:08:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Level quote: ORIGINAL: nefertari quote: ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie quote: ORIGINAL: nefertari quote: ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie quote: ORIGINAL: nefertari Start hijack. Julia, I completely agree with you. The pro-lifers are all about making sure the babies are born and then wash their hands of it. They are not at all concerned with quality of life. They want to make sure these babies are born, but they are part of the same group of people who cut medicaid and other benefits to these children. If you are going to force them to be born, you're responsibility for them cannot stop at birth. End hijack. Please do not begin to tell me what I am all about. You truly do not know. I did not reference you at all. I also did not say that all pro-lifers wanted to do so. I stated they are part of the same group that does. Which is a fact. "The pro-lifers" appears all encompassing. As opposed to "some" or "many pro-lifers." Apparently I have misunderstood an unclear post. Sigh....now you're just being catty. No, she's being correct. If it was not rhetoric, then it was at the very least an annoying blanket statement. I find lots of things annoying. Like using the term "grinding up babies" when talking about stem cell research. You didn't appear to have a problem with that term. Maybe because it suits your argument? It wasn't meant to be a blanket statement, per se. However, the same side that is for banning abortion is the same side that wants to cut benefits such as medicaid. However, that's already been explained and you're just not interested in hearing it. You just want to continue on your kick. Fine with me.

LotusSong -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/30/2006 4:30:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Level It's also the body of the child inside... you know, the one being eliminated. Have you spoken personally to many of these to form this opinion? I'd like to hear about your fond memories of being a fetus if you would care to share. And if you had a choice of being born into a stable family where your needs would be taken care of.. or born to a 12 yr old mother that has suffered the trauma of a rape or incest.. which would you choose?

Level -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/30/2006 4:40:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Level No, she's being correct. If it was not rhetoric, then it was at the very least an annoying blanket statement. quote: Original: nefetari I find lots of things annoying. Like using the term "grinding up babies" when talking about stem cell research. You didn't appear to have a problem with that term. Maybe because it suits your argument? It wasn't meant to be a blanket statement, per se. However, the same side that is for banning abortion is the same side that wants to cut benefits such as medicaid. However, that's already been explained and you're just not interested in hearing it. You just want to continue on your kick. Fine with me. I, being quite ignorant about much of the subject at hand, very tentatively support the stem cell research in question. So perhaps you're not nearly as knowledgable about what my "argument" is as you may think. You may not have meant it as a blanket statement, but that's what it was, as is "the same side that is for banning abortion is the same side that wants to cut benefits such as medicaid". Some do, some don't. And you're right, I'm very much not interested in hearing blanket statements about anyone. If you want to take aim at individuals or specific groups that want to do whatever, then you may (or may not) find me on your side. Anyone that says "Republicans are......", or "Democrats are......" is likely treading the grounds of ignorance. I used to do so myself, back when The Nation and Mother Jones were the sole sources of information for me, but I have spent a number of years trying to go beyond that.

juliaoceania -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/30/2006 4:45:25 PM)
quote: However, the same side that is for banning abortion is the same side that wants to cut benefits such as medicaid. However, that's already been explained and you're just not interested in hearing it. You just want to continue on your kick. Fine with me. Its easy to condemn a practice out of hand, but it is a different matter to create a world in which the practice is no longer needed. The best we can do is reduce the necessity of abortion because women have always done this and will probably always do this whether legal or not, or whether society smiles or frowns upon it. As a country we pay a lot of lipservice to children and their rights, in practice we do not value them much. This is why childcare is a low paying job, teachers are the lowest paid for their skillset. The largest percentage of people living in poverty are children (disgusting but true). The working poor cannot afford medical insurance, and their kids are often uninsured, which has caused more than one child to die prematurely. We want to deny illegals access to medical care, even pregnant ones and minor ones. 2000 children die each week from drinking dirty water around the world, more die from malnutrition. These deaths are highly preventable, and someone could argue it is murderous that we do not pay the pitance it would cost to provide clean water to children that live in megacities for example. I am more worried about children that already exist compared cells in petri dishes or women that are in their first trimester having abortions. I am not sure when life starts, but I am confident I know when it ends, and many children have a premature ending to their lives because they are poor and for no other reason. In fact many of fetuses that are aborted may not have been had their mother's been prepared to bring them into the world. The way to end abortion is to end poverty and shame surrounding sex and reproduction... at least that has been shown to be the case. I have appreciated your comments.

Level -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/30/2006 4:48:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LotusSong quote: ORIGINAL: Level It's also the body of the child inside... you know, the one being eliminated. Have you spoken personally to many of these to form this opinion? I'd like to hear about your fond memories of being a fetus if you would care to share. Yeah...... that's funny. I imagine Leno is lining you up to guest host for him. And if you had a choice of being born into a stable family where your needs would be taken care of.. or born to a 12 yr old mother that has suffered the trauma of a rape or incest.. which would you choose? Pretty easy question, I'd choose life. Now, if you want to know how I feel about a woman in one of those scenarios, I certainly don't look down my nose at the ones that would choose abortion.

juliaoceania -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/30/2006 4:51:36 PM)
If it is a sentient life when the mother was not raped or a victim of incest, it is a life when she is. I do not understand that argument, it basically stating that the punishment for having sex if you spread your legs is you have the baby, but if you are a "victim" then it is ok to have an abortion. I prefer not to look at the issue as being one of baby killing, because I do not believe it is, but if I felt it was i would not argue it is ok to murder someone because their life was conceived in the commission of a crime.. it is not logical

Level -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/30/2006 4:55:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania If it is a sentient life when the mother was not raped or a victim of incest, it is a life when she is. I do not understand that argument, it basically stating that the punishment for having sex if you spread your legs is you have the baby, but if you are a "victim" then it is ok to have an abortion. I prefer not to look at the issue as being one of baby killing, because I do not believe it is, but if I felt it was i would not argue it is ok to murder someone because their life was conceived in the commission of a crime.. it is not logical I'll assume you aren't stating that is my argument, as I did not say it is. I said I don't look down on those that were raped.... I have much more empathy for them than the 93% of abortions that are done for convenience. But you're right, if one believes that it's a life being ended, that empathy can't be the driving force to reaching an opinion.

juliaoceania -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/30/2006 5:12:55 PM)
I have empathy for anyone facing an unwanted pregnancy. I have a lot of empathy for a lot of people though. I tend to think that we should walk a mile in the shoes of another before we think we can judge them. Most unwanted pregnancies happen to very young women, the type that lack sense, judgment, and are ignorant about many things in life. The ones that choose "life" and keep the baby are judged and have a long hard road to haul. The ones that choose adoption also often have emotional scars. The ones that choose abortion do too.... there is no good outcome for a female alone and pregnant. As someone that was a single mom when my son was 8 1/2 months old I have to say I have first hand experience on what it is to be in that position, mine is 16 now. I love him dearly, I sacrificed much for him as parents do. It would be easy for me to be judgmental, but I have more empathy than most because I have been there and done that. Most posting on this thread haven't, they have no clue what it is to do the single mom thing in this country. They have no idea what it is like to be on medi aid for the poor, they have no idea what it is to work over 40 hours a week as the sole bread earner making a pitance, I do, been there done that. And I had more help than many do. Without my extended family i do not think I could have done it. For men to judge women when 1/4 of the kids in this country do not get the child support from the absent parent (as in my case) and they make almost 30 cents more on the dollar more than we do is a bit galling. Yes, it is all connected, if I faced the choice today in the climate of this country the way it is and i had an unwanted pregnancy as a single 18 or 20 something I would probably have an abortion because this country just does not give a shit about the kids in it. Think about the word "working poor", those working 40 hours a week and still in poverty, and then understand that the working poor is primarily single moms, I judge that, not them.... it is appalling.

nefertari -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/30/2006 5:39:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania quote: However, the same side that is for banning abortion is the same side that wants to cut benefits such as medicaid. However, that's already been explained and you're just not interested in hearing it. You just want to continue on your kick. Fine with me. Its easy to condemn a practice out of hand, but it is a different matter to create a world in which the practice is no longer needed. The best we can do is reduce the necessity of abortion because women have always done this and will probably always do this whether legal or not, or whether society smiles or frowns upon it. As a country we pay a lot of lipservice to children and their rights, in practice we do not value them much. This is why childcare is a low paying job, teachers are the lowest paid for their skillset. The largest percentage of people living in poverty are children (disgusting but true). The working poor cannot afford medical insurance, and their kids are often uninsured, which has caused more than one child to die prematurely. We want to deny illegals access to medical care, even pregnant ones and minor ones. 2000 children die each week from drinking dirty water around the world, more die from malnutrition. These deaths are highly preventable, and someone could argue it is murderous that we do not pay the pitance it would cost to provide clean water to children that live in megacities for example. I am more worried about children that already exist compared cells in petri dishes or women that are in their first trimester having abortions. I am not sure when life starts, but I am confident I know when it ends, and many children have a premature ending to their lives because they are poor and for no other reason. In fact many of fetuses that are aborted may not have been had their mother's been prepared to bring them into the world. The way to end abortion is to end poverty and shame surrounding sex and reproduction... at least that has been shown to be the case. I have appreciated your comments. Thank you, Julia. And I have appreciated yours as well. We seem to be of a like mind in several areas in regards to this subject. I absolutely agree that the best way to reduce abortion is to create an environment where it is no longer necessary. I haven't done any research on the matter, but it seems that ending poverty and education are two key areas. I don't know that I agree with the "shame surrounding sex and reproduction", though and it's possible I just don't understand exactly what you mean by that. As the mother of a teenager, there doesn't seem to be any shame surrounding sex with the younger generation. It seems to be glamorized entirely too much and has become a status symbol. There also seems to be little fear - of pregnancy, std's, what have you. I see that enough around my own age group, so it's no surprise to see it in the younger generations. I remember a commercial that used to air. It was a girl covering her brother's chicken pox with makeup and telling him he could leave school after lunch. He needed to go to school, though, as there he would receive his only meal for the day. That saddens me immensly. The commercial's inent was to tug on the heartstrings. But, unfortunately, it is a very real situation for many. If we truly want to end abortion, we as a society need to be willing to make sure the children are taken care of. We need to ensure they have food, clothing, housing, medical care and an education. We need to create an environment where it is not ok or acceptable for the father to avoid his responsibility in providing for the child. So often the responsibility of these children rests solely with the mother. (And yes, I do know that it does happen the other way around, too. It is, however, largely one-sided, but it should not be acceptable in either case.) What is the saying - it takes a village to raise a child? The sad thing is, I feel silly even saying these things out loud. I think it would be easier to move mountains. And, I'm with you in that I'm far more concerned with children that already exist than with a fetus in the first trimester.

juliaoceania -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/30/2006 5:56:27 PM)
quote: don't know that I agree with the "shame surrounding sex and reproduction", though and it's possible I just don't understand exactly what you mean by that. What I mean about this is that although there is reproductive education in schools, there is a huge mixed message in this country. We have had this moral right wing swing in this country in which sex is supposed to be taboo, women get blamed for the bad outcomes of sexuality, and even though sex is glamourized, it is also stlll laughed about. Girls still get the short end of the stick. I have not kept up with the latest teen pregnancy stats, so I do not know if it is up or down, and it does tend to cycle. quote: I remember a commercial that used to air. It was a girl covering her brother's chicken pox with makeup and telling him he could leave school after lunch. He needed to go to school, though, as there he would receive his only meal for the day. That saddens me immensly. The commercial's inent was to tug on the heartstrings. But, unfortunately, it is a very real situation for many. I have a friend that diagnosed kids with special needs in the school system, the ones that fall between the cracks of society. She said that it is common that the only meals a kid gets are the ones the school provides. It was something that crossed her mind every weekend when friday night came, how many kids would not be eating that weekend? Sad but true. There are many kids that are malnurished in this country which can impact them for life as they have shown kids that suffer from malnutrition often have lower IQs and life skillsets, not to mention an increased likelihood for many medical conditions. Literacy takes a huge dip in children in this risk group. BTW, I have studied these issues, I had considered doing an ethnography of poor working moms in the USA

Sinergy -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/30/2006 5:59:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LotusSong quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy Michael J. Fox may be on that medication, but he may also be on a whole cocktail of drugs to quell the effects of the brain misfires. Just me, etc. Sinergy When I last saw my neurologist, I asked him if I would be at risk of getting Parkinson's someday. He told me that eventually EVERYONE gets it to a degree. Five to one and one in five. No one here gets out alive. Jim Morrison. This is true. Although if one thing doesnt punch out my time card, something else will. Because of this, I tend to view what time I have here in this place as a gift. I tend to follow Zen principles on life. What matters is right here, right now. Not yesterday. Not tomorrow. Should there be a hereafter, I imagine I will get to go there and be in the now in that place as well. Sinergy

Sinergy -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/30/2006 6:04:45 PM)
Hello A/all, When I had the birds and the bees talk with my unmentionables, I told them both that I would support their right to get an abortion, take them to the doctor, fight off the ignorant nitwits trying to retroactively abort the physician, etc. I also pointed out to them that while I support abortion, I abhor waste. I said to them that if they decided to keep the child, I would do whatever I could do to make it work. But that is just me, and I could be wrong. Sinergy

nefertari -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/30/2006 6:55:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania quote: don't know that I agree with the "shame surrounding sex and reproduction", though and it's possible I just don't understand exactly what you mean by that. What I mean about this is that although there is reproductive education in schools, there is a huge mixed message in this country. We have had this moral right wing swing in this country in which sex is supposed to be taboo, women get blamed for the bad outcomes of sexuality, and even though sex is glamourized, it is also stlll laughed about. Girls still get the short end of the stick. I have not kept up with the latest teen pregnancy stats, so I do not know if it is up or down, and it does tend to cycle. Thank you for explaining. Absolutely. There has always been the stigma and double standard and the responsibility mostly falls to the girl. I've even heard men say that they didn't want the kid, they wanted her to have an abortion, so why should thy have to help support the kid. Sex is glamorized and girls think they need to perform in order to be liked. quote: I remember a commercial that used to air. It was a girl covering her brother's chicken pox with makeup and telling him he could leave school after lunch. He needed to go to school, though, as there he would receive his only meal for the day. That saddens me immensly. The commercial's inent was to tug on the heartstrings. But, unfortunately, it is a very real situation for many. quote: I have a friend that diagnosed kids with special needs in the school system, the ones that fall between the cracks of society. She said that it is common that the only meals a kid gets are the ones the school provides. It was something that crossed her mind every weekend when friday night came, how many kids would not be eating that weekend? Sad but true. There are many kids that are malnurished in this country which can impact them for life as they have shown kids that suffer from malnutrition often have lower IQs and life skillsets, not to mention an increased likelihood for many medical conditions. Literacy takes a huge dip in children in this risk group. BTW, I have studied these issues, I had considered doing an ethnography of poor working moms in the USA Fortunately, all of the schools in our district now provide breakfast as well as lunch - and free or reduced to those whose income qualifies. But until this year, breakfast was only offered at one or two out of the eight school buildings in our district. That still doesn't address weekends, but it helps. Sadly, though, the only reason they have made this change is because they know it affects test scores and the school gets a report card based on those scores every year from the state. Prior to this change, on proficiency test days, volunteers from each class would bring in breakfast to their classroom. My son had a friend in the past who used to come over quite a bit on the weekends just to eat. Or at least that's how it appeared. He always came over around meal time and I know his family struggled.

ownedgirlie -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/30/2006 10:41:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy quote: ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie I simply do not know if it is a better option. I was bringing it up for discussion, as no one seemed to want to talk about it as an option, or even a future option. You in turn provided a 9 year old study that is likely outdated by now. I only wanted to bring the option up for discussion. I do not have a means to answer your question of proving it is better. I provided a study from a site you recommended as being able to answer the question I was asking. Then you proceeded to try to denigrate it by saying it was 9 years old. So I asked you for something more recent, and you state that you have no means of providing the information I asked you for. Umm, ok. Well Sinergy, it is just you, and you are wrong. My apologies in advance to everyone else in this thread as I attempt to correct what was apparently missed. I am actually not sure where the thread you posted was derived from, as I only posted one link to Science Daily and it was from 2003. In fact, the threads I posted were: News Science - 2005 Innovations Report - 2003 BBC News - 2005 Science Daily – 2003 Medical College of Wisconsin – 2004 Science Blog – 2003 High Beam Research – 2003 Clinical Trials from the US National Institute of Health – 2006 NCBI from the US National Institute of Health – 2006 NCBI from the US National Institute of Health – 2005 NCBI from the US National Institute of Health – 2000 NCBI from the US National Institute of Health – 2004 NCBI from the US National Institute of Health – 2003 NCBI from the US National Institute of Health – 2001 Check my post - #46. The article you later referred to - from 1997 is not in it. So no, it was not something I linked for you. You provided a 9 year old study which you found on I site I shared with you. The updated study I shared was only 3 years old. quote: In my experience, which may have nothing to do with you, many in the ranks of those opposed to abortion tend to bring up things like "umbilical cord stem cells" as a panacea which could be used instead of fetal stem cells. It has not been empirically proven to be so. It is a method of getting stem cells that have some uses. I am sorry you took my response as hostility This was what I viewed as hostility: From your post #78: “so there is another flaw in my position you may feel free to exploit should you so choose.” Exploit? Why would you suggest I "exploit" your flaw? I pointed out an earlier flaw, is that what you meant? Do you feel that a pointed out flaw is an exploitation? If so, I think we see things differently there. quote: .I asked you for some empirical evidence to suggest that umbilical stem cells were as effective as fetal stem cells, and you provided a long list of sites promoting umbilical stem cells. Wrong again. I sent you links to 7 publications which discussed such studies ,and links to 7 Federally funded clinical studies reported by the National Library of Medicine. quote: As I pointed out, this did not answer my question. How did providing the studies you asked for not answer your question to please provide studies? quote: When pressed, you admitted being unable to provide me with the information I asked you for. So I will ask you again, what do you base your conclusion that umbilical stem cells are as effective as fetal stem cells? Where in my posts did I come to this conclusion? Please let me refresh you with what I have been saying: From Post #26 “However, isn't a happy-medium on this topic the option of umbilical cord stem cells? I think all sides are in agreement on that one. Is there no room for compromise?” From Post #27 “I agree, Level. Just because we have the knowledge of how to do something, does not mean it is the right thing to do.” From Post #38 “I proposed in a previous post that umbilical cord stem cells are an alternative, and why can we not compromise and use those? However, that seems to have been overlooked.” From Post #57 “And I continue to ask the unanswered question - if a medical situation can be resolved by umbilical cord blood cells, would you use that over fetal cells?” From Post #63 “It's a fair question to ask, isn't it? Shouldn't ALL questions be asked before embarking on such a path?” And (I am emphasizing here what you may have understood as a conclusion. If only wishes were conclusions!) “*My own personal wish* is that umbilical cord blood cells provide equal benefit to embryonic stem cells, and are sufficient enough.” quote: There is a book called "Pure Drivel" written by Steve Martin. In one of the chapters, he is talking about the bird bath in his back yard, which he knows was carved by Raphael. He does not know this because of studies. He does not know this because of any research he has done. He knows this because he has a deep certainty which transcends empirical investigation. I don't get it. You asked for studies. Are you now saying studies don't matter? quote: While I understand you have no means of stating that umbilical cells are better, what I find in discussions with people who oppose the use of fetal stem cells is a lack of a scientific basis to substantiate their claims. When pressed, what generally happens is they resort to waving whatever their belief systems and ethical biases are as a means of avoiding the question. Again, this may not include you. On the other hand, the more you write about it, it is difficult for me to not class you with the other uneducated anti stem cell research zealots. According to you then, I'm an anti stem cell research zealot, even though I have not stated one position in this thread against stem cell research. You seem to infer from my questions that I am against it, while all along I have been saying that I'm just asking questions that need to be asked. You see, Sinergy, I don't really know my position on stem cell research. I am inconclusive on it. And because I am inconclusive, I am asking if there is a better option. I have been proposing that we discuss whether or not there are alternatives that are just as good or almost as good. I have said at least once in this thread that I just think ALL the questions need to be asked. I am amazed at the conclusions you have drawn from that. quote: This also raises another important question. Since Monkeyboy et al have cut most funding and propose amendments to the constitution to prevent the use of fetal stem cells, the scientific community has been at a standstill in their research into them. You state that the study was 9 years old. That is true, there has been almost no stem cell research in the United States for 6 of those years because of the guy Dumbfuckistan put into office. Since we have such a limit to the availability of fetal stem cells, and a lack of funding, it is not even possible to do the research to determine if umbilical stem cells are better or worse than fetal stem cells. First, I won't refer to any president of my country, whether I adore him or despise him, as such a remark. Second, if there has been no research done since President Bush has been in office, then what of the studies posted from 2000 to 2006, which were reported in the US National Institute of Health? Those were not articles; they were links to clinical trials. We used that site regularly in my Nutrition class, to discuss and refer to various clinical studies.

ownedgirlie -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/30/2006 10:54:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Level quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle "Many millions of people oppose stem cell research because they believe they are defending human life. This is not a bad thing. " If it ain't THEIR LIFE, it ain't THEIR BUSINESS... I disagree. I saw an old lady being attacked across the street this morning. I did nothing. It's her life, it ain't my business. Okay I didn't really see an old lady being attacked.

NorthernGent -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/30/2006 11:43:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Level quote: ORIGINAL: nefertari quote: ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie quote: ORIGINAL: nefertari quote: ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie quote: ORIGINAL: nefertari Start hijack. Julia, I completely agree with you. The pro-lifers are all about making sure the babies are born and then wash their hands of it. They are not at all concerned with quality of life. They want to make sure these babies are born, but they are part of the same group of people who cut medicaid and other benefits to these children. If you are going to force them to be born, you're responsibility for them cannot stop at birth. End hijack. Please do not begin to tell me what I am all about. You truly do not know. I did not reference you at all. I also did not say that all pro-lifers wanted to do so. I stated they are part of the same group that does. Which is a fact. "The pro-lifers" appears all encompassing. As opposed to "some" or "many pro-lifers." Apparently I have misunderstood an unclear post. Sigh....now you're just being catty. No, she's being correct. If it was not rhetoric, then it was at the very least an annoying blanket statement. I've read through the thread and certainly didn't take nefertari's comment the way you seem to have. I doubt very much that nefertari was claiming she has surveyed every pro-lifer to arrive at a conclusion. It was a comment based on her own experience (thus, it has some basis and is not a blanket statement). Furthermore, there are people on this board who are inflammotary and say all sorts of bizarre things with no basis whatsoever. From the posts I've read, nefertari is not one of them.

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875