PP's Teenwire at Batavia Library
Posted by Roger on Tuesday, June 17th, 2008
Today's Aurora Beacon had a front-page article about a group of families who are opposed to Batavia's Library link to Planned Parenthood's Teenwire web site. Here's are links to the articles:
The article says that the group of families who are opposing this has put together a PowerPoint presentation to show to the library board as to why they oppose having a link to PP's site. It should be interesting. Hopefully, the Beacon will print a follow-up article tomorrow.
God Bless,
Roger
Great post Roger!
Just wanted everyone to know that the Batavia Library Board is meeting tonight to discuss this issue. Here's the details:
EVENT: Batavia Library Board Meeting
WHEN: Tuesday, June 17, 2008
WHERE: Batavia Public Library, 10 S. Batavia Ave.
MAP: http://tinyurl.com/5v3kng
I'd encourage everyone who can make it to show up and let the Batavia Library Board know that we don't want them promoting Planned Parenthood's radically promiscuous vision of human sexuality.
This should be very concerning, especially if you're a Batavia parent. Great job to the families that have brought this issue to light!
June 17th, 2008 at 2:06 pm
Is it possible to put the Powerpoint presentation on your website so we can see it?
Mike
June 17th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Yes, I would like to see the PowerPoint too. Is there a way you can write about all of this in more detail? I'd like to link to it so folks can get a true idea about how awful the site is. I visited it yesterday. It's both upsetting and troubling to say the least.
http://cathlete.net
June 17th, 2008 at 5:07 pm
Did you guys just crawl out from under a rock? Why would you protest a library? That is a place where people that can actually read and comprehend go.
June 17th, 2008 at 8:00 pm
How horrible that actual information can be found at a library, of all places. Guess what? Teens think about having sex. It is critical that they get correct, accurate information about what can lead to an accidental pregnancy. Otherwise, they will spread wrong and harmful information (you can't get pregnant unless there is intercourse, jumping up and down can prevent pregnancy, etc).
I'm curious what age *would* be appropriate to learn about sex? Do you really want everyone to wait until marriage to even know the facts???
June 17th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
Is there a site you WOULD consider appropriate that includes comprehensive sex education? Anything at all? If so, I'd love to see it.
June 17th, 2008 at 8:46 pm
Maybe one that didn't say "don't listen to your parents about sex. Just do what you think is right and be as safe as possible." That's a fair paraphrase of:
"When it comes to discussing sex, parents can be misleading. Angry. Defensive. Clueless. Often, they want to get the whole thing over with in One Big Talk — or they don't want to talk about it at all."
It reminds of the woman who spoke at the City council meeting saying "you're kids are having sex, and I'll be there to teach them about dental dams." Thanks, but no thanks, student.
June 17th, 2008 at 10:05 pm
"Of the 22 civilizations that have appeared in history, 19 of them collapsed when they reached the moral state America is in today."
Arnold Toynbee
June 17th, 2008 at 11:57 pm
The fact is that many parents ARE angry, defensive, embarrassed, ignorant, and want to get 'the talk' over with as soon as possible. I know many people who had to deal with parents like this. SOMEONE has to fill in the gaps. Let's face it, 'just say no' doesn't work. It is MUCH better to educate kids, in an age appropriate manner, about their bodies. For example, talk about menstruation *before* it happens so girls don't think they have cancer. That means 8 years old. Talk about the risks of sex *before* kids are thinking of being sexually active. That means 11-12 years old. Give *accurate* information about pregnancy and diseases. Most parents don't know the most recent studies.
Once again, what site *would* give the information you would consider appropriate?
June 18th, 2008 at 7:07 am
Karen K, Toynbee died in 1975, before gay marriage was ever an issue, and this quote dates before Roe v Wade. Furthermore, it simply isn't true. Of the civilizations that did collapse, most did so from military issues or from the result of famine. Rome fell, interestingly enough, because it overextended its resources and because it adopted christianity as its official religion, destabilizing the basis of having a caesar to begin with.
June 18th, 2008 at 7:27 am
I, too, would love to see a sex education site that you would deem appropriate. I see a lot of criticism of Teenwire. Can you offer an alternative?
June 18th, 2008 at 7:28 am
You call Teenwire sex education "correct, accurate information" ???
June 18th, 2008 at 8:56 am
Unfortunately, kids are having sex, and it is because of people who instead of teaching that it is wrong tell them go ahead but "play it safe". There is no longer a right or wrong, just do it, act on every emotion and never tell anyone they should not. Planned Parenthood's idea of sex education is to promote every kind of perversion and filth to fulfill their agenda, "we need pregnant people, because how else are we to continue our huge money making business of abortion?" They kill a quarter of a million children a year! If Planned Parenthood's Teen wire site is your idea of "Sex Education" All I can say about you is, "If you sit in the sewer long enough you are going to smell." Something really reeks, the moral decline in this country smells to high Heaven. It is time for those who believe there is a right and wrong given to us by our Creator, to say so and do something about it. Help our children from sinking deeper into that sewer.
June 18th, 2008 at 9:00 am
So nobody here has another site they can suggest? I get that you don't like PP. Ok, give me an alternative sex education site that is acceptable or is it that sex ed simply isn't ok with you people?
June 18th, 2008 at 9:24 am
You said,
“Karen K, Toynbee died in 1975, before gay marriage was ever an issue, and this quote dates before Roe v Wade."
Thank you for saying this, it just re-enforces the fact that we are even worse than when Toynbee said his words. He thought things were bad then, he must be rolling over in his grave now.
You said,
"Furthermore, it simply isn't true. Of the civilizations that did collapse, most did so from military issues or from the result of famine. Rome fell, interestingly enough, because it overextended its resources"
Again, thank you for stating this, it shows plainly, "You reap what you sow" What do you think happens to a country when it is rotting from every kind of malice and sin. It decomposes.
You said,
"and because it adopted Christianity as its official religion, destabilizing the basis of having a Caesar to begin with."
And when we destabilized Nazi Germany, oh, was that a bad thing?
June 18th, 2008 at 9:33 am
AuroraResident, Go to PureLoveClub.com
June 18th, 2008 at 9:37 am
Karen: Thank you for providing a site. I did look at it and found it full of misinformation. This is hardly a sex education site. It is primarily an AO site that also tells kids that there is something wrong with them if they are homosexual. I found it offensive. However, I am not opposed to the Batavia Library making this site available along with Teenwire, nor would I have an objection to my kids viewing same — we would, however, discuss it so that the things I disagree with (on either site) could be further hashed out.
June 18th, 2008 at 10:44 am
Student, Professor, et.al.,
Well, let's start with the supposed misinformation. What factual inaccuracies are being promulgated by abstinence only sex-ed? (Didn't get an answer last time I asked about that, but I'll keep trying)
But let's examine our assumptions here. No one is saying we should ban Teenwire from the internet, or even ban people being able to access it on the internet at the library! The only objection being raised is that the library is taking a highly controversial site, with material that most certainly could not be shown in a school classroom or even on network television and saying to teens "Here, this is the best site for you to get health information from."
Why does the library need to have a recommended website for teens to get information about sex? Are they unfamiliar with the card catalog system or Google for that matter? Do you really think teens are so computer illiterate that, if the library didn't tell them where to get health information, they couldn't find it?
And, with their $1.1 billion dollar budget and $350 million in government money (read: taxpayer money), why does the Planned Parenthood promiscuity machine need more help from our local library?
The reasons this link does not need to be there are legion. We're not asking for censorship, we're just asking for the library to not promote sexual behaviors that a huge portion of the population finds highly objectionable to our children.
June 18th, 2008 at 11:52 am
Unless I missed it, I didn't see anyone state that inaccuracies are being promulgated by AO education. Like another poster, I viewed the "PureLove" site and found a lot of partial information, bad information and statement I personally disagree with.
So the bottom line is that you're offended by the library listing TeenWire as a suggested site? Are they forcing anyone to look at it?
I assume you're of the belief that the library should recommend nothing? They should probably not recommend books or websites on topics other than health either, right?
The tax payer argument fails on its face. There are lots of things funded with my tax money with which I disagree.
Yet you truly don't care about exposing other children to things many (if not most) in the general population find highly objectionable. That sounds like a huge double standard to me.
June 18th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
Student,
I'll address some of your other questions later (and you do raise some good ones) but real quick, you said:
Unless I missed it, I didn't see anyone state that inaccuracies are being promulgated by AO education.
A poster before my comment said:
I did look at it and found it full of misinformation.
And Professor said:
It is critical that they get correct, accurate information about what can lead to an accidental pregnancy.
Which, to me, implies that the sources we recommend are giving incorrect, inaccurate information.
I was going on those statements when requesting specifics about the inaccuracies, but it's good to know you're not making that charge.
Btw, is there a difference between accidental pregnancy and the regular kind
June 18th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
I just went to purelove.com and in under a minute to the right of the screen there is what appear to be porno web sites.You people are so against PP that you would rather children look at sites like "oral sex"
"The perfect orgasm" "Black Booty" "horny woman" "G-spot".You are insane to even suggest a site like that for anyone to go to.In case you can't find it go to purelove.com and click on sexual relationships.That is what most teens want to know about so that is what they will find.Face it Teenwire is at least informative not vulgar.
June 18th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
I guess to me that meant s/he was looking at the PureLove site — I didn't realize s/he was talking about AO, in general. Perhaps I erred there?
Ok, maybe this is an interpretive disagreement also. I didn't see any sources recommended until after that post was up, thus, I don't know why you would make that assumption.
June 18th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
June 18th, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Kathy,
It appears you went to purelove dot com
whereas karen suggested you go to pureloveclub dot com.
Those two sites are completely different. One is an abstinence education site, the other is something else entirely.
June 18th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
sorry
June 18th, 2008 at 1:56 pm
Well, I looked that the pueloveclub site. The basic attitude is that sex outside of marriage is wrong and even inside marriage it is wrong if contraception is used. The actual facts at the site were few and far between. Instead, it is mostly Catholic propaganda about sexuality. That's fine for those who want to be strictly religious in that way and are aware of the alternatives, but it shows, in my opinion, a particularly narrow view of human potential. Sex is a good, natural way for people to relate.
Yes, I believe in sex before marriage. I HOPE my daughter has several partners before she gets married (if she ever does). That is how one learns about the beauties of sexuality and the range of possibilities it can allow. I also HOPE my daughter knows about the risks involved (pregnancy, STDs, emotional hurt) and of the range of possibilities (manual stimulation, oral sex, anal sex, etc). You see, I consider a satisfying sex life to be one of the wonderful things about being human and I want her to have that. As painful as it is, I also expect her to go through some emotionally difficult break-ups. That is part of becoming an adult.
Some particular points of misinformation/inaccurate propaganda. The site suggests that AO education is effective. This has been shown to be false by several studies. While it can delay the time of first intercourse, it does NOT decrease the risk of STDs and pregnancy because those who go through AO do not use safer practices when they DO become active.
The site also emphasizes the difficulties of gossip and loss of reputation if you have sex. Sorry, but the gossip of narrow-minded busy-bodies should simply be ignored. Perhaps then we can get away from the lurid sexuality promoted by it being 'wrong' and come to a more healthy sexuality inspired by mutual respect, openness, and an expectation of equality in relationships.
June 18th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
Professor,
Thank you for putting into words what most people actually feel but some are afraid to admit.
June 18th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
Here are some websites and articles with accurate medical information about sex,
Read the article in Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health Volume 36, Number 1, Jan./Feb. 2004 "Sexually Transmitted Disezses among American Youth: Incidence and Prevalence Estimates, 2000" by Hillard Weinstock, Stuart Berman and Willard Cates, Jr.
Also read National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Workshop Summary: Scientific Evidence on Condom Effectiveness for Sexually Transmitted Disease (STD) Prevention, Herndon, WA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2001.
Absolutely NO RESPONSIBLE ADULT should be telling teens that condoms or anything else except 2 people saving sex for marriage or a life-long commited relationship and being faithful to that one person for life is safe. Sex education is the ONLY area of health education where adults promote to teens anything less than the safest and healthiest choices.
When condoms or other choices are mentioned they should not be promoted but the fact that they are only possible risk reduction, many of the prevalent STDs are transmitted skin to skin NOT by exchanging body fluids, which means they can be transmitted by areas not even covered by a condom.
Any organization that is going to make millions of dollars off of promoting and teaching teens to engage in risky sexual behavior should NOT be given ANY access to teens period. sorry for the long post.
June 18th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
I submitted a response about the question about what are reliable websites for teens to get factual information about sex. Did you get it? I am sorry it is so long, I do not know how to shorten or add links to my post because I am new at this.
June 18th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
Karen:
The Toynbee quote just points out that if things have gotten worse morally, we still are a viable nation. Toynbee was wrong.
Your response concerning morality and the fall of nations is a non-sequitur; I pointed out that moral decay has NOT led to the fall of any civilization. If anything, Rome points out the danger of allowing religion to become central to a nation.
Where did nazi germany come into the discussion–I was speaking about Rome. Germany didn't fall because of moral reasons, it fell because hitler overextended himself, just like rome did. Just as bush is doing with this country today. And it should be pointed out that one of the first things hitler did was outlaw abortion.
June 18th, 2008 at 3:26 pm
This pure live club is obviously catholic in nature, but for some reason refuses to just come out and say so. Why is that?
I laughed out loud at this quote: "Romance without regret does exist." Of course it does, and it does whether you've had sex or not. On the other hand, there are purely platonic romances that end bitterly. Sexless romance is no guarantee of happiness.
Abstinence-only education is not a problem because it is inaccurate; it is a problem because it doesn't work. Kids are still having sex and will continue to have sex. Instead of pretending that it doesn't happen, these kids need to have the facts that could protect them from pregnancy and STD's. Of course, much of this could be alleviated if we stopped equating love and sex; they are completely different things that are great on their own and that can complement each other. If a teen understands that having sex is not a reaction to affection OR a substitute for affection, there will likely be less sex going on.
June 18th, 2008 at 3:36 pm
I've been to teenwire several times and have yet to find anything inaccurate. Who cares if you can't find this info in schools? School is there to give the impetus to learn and to provide basic discipline and knowledge, not be the sum total of everything one learns.
Teenwire also addresses the issues facing gay teens; I don't see that on the PLC. But telling a gay kid they can't have sex until marriage and then saying that they aren't allowed to GET married makes the whole catch-22 meaningless.
June 18th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
Educator,
Any posts with lots of links get held for moderation automatically.
Thanks for your post! Lots of great info.
June 18th, 2008 at 3:49 pm
Sorry I did not need to repost. I do apologize you can delete my repost
June 18th, 2008 at 4:06 pm
No responsible adult should be telling teens that driving is absolutely safe. If they want to completely avoid dying in an automobile accident, they should avoid driving or being driving in a car. But I suspect that you realize that we *do* promote teen driving even though it is NOT the 'safest and healthiest' choice. They way we do this is to inform them of the risks, teach them the rules of the road, place restrictions on their driving at first, and then, after time, allow them to make their own choices.
June 18th, 2008 at 4:20 pm
No, actually. The only safe sex is masturbation. And, unless your municipality has very different rules from mine, there is no test to insure that two people getting married know anything about sex, relationships, or anything else for that matter.
So why is marriage such a big deal? Don't give me any religious mumbo-jumbo. A marriage contract is NOT a verification of adulthood, nor a test of any knowledge or skill. It is simply a civil contract. But I don't want the government getting involved in who I choose for a partner of why. Even less do I want a church involved. SO, yes, I WILL have sex outside of marriage. I will NOT condemn those who choose to do so also. I will encourage responsible sexuality (avoidance of pregnancies and STIs and communication between all partners). And I will encourage people to use birth control and, if they choose not to have children at all, to get sterilized (yes, I have had a vasectomy-that's the responsible thing to do). I will also fight against the narrow-minded attitudes promoted by certain religious factions that see sex in an inherently negative light.
June 18th, 2008 at 8:19 pm
I promote PP mostly because it is one of the few organizations that consistently give good information without judgment. They also provide needed services to those in need, from birth control to, yes, abortions.
June 18th, 2008 at 8:21 pm
"SO, yes, I WILL have sex outside of marriage. I will NOT condemn those who choose to do so also. I will encourage responsible sexuality (avoidance of pregnancies and STIs and communication between all partners). And I will encourage people to use birth control and, if they choose not to have children at all, to get sterilized (yes, I have had a vasectomy-that's the responsible thing to do). I will also fight against the narrow-minded attitudes promoted by certain religious factions that see sex in an inherently negative light."
Bully for you. I hope you didn't hurt your arm patting yourself on the back for taking a stand that no one says you can't take. What's good for you is not necessarily good for others. Why encourage others to use birth control? Why can't you stay out of their business?
You and your friend ask what sites others might approve of. Why do we need to prove to you that their are sites that are good? Why can't we just raise our kids without having them bombarded with a culture of promiscuity from people like you? And if we choose to avoid that culture, who do you think you are to object to the choice to avoid it? Get over yourself.
June 18th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
You've got to be kidding me, right?
First of all, which "friend" are you referring to. Me, Midnightcyn, Kathy, AuroraResident, or Denise. You spit out that word friend like it's something bad.
Raise your kids any way you like, however, nobody is forcing your kids to look at ANY website at the library. On the other hand, your group forces its opinions on others and FORCES images in the faces of our children that we find offensive and inappropriate. Again, I love your double standard.
June 18th, 2008 at 8:50 pm
Excuse me??!? You, the ones who want to stick your noses into everyone else's business? What business is it of yours if someone has sex outside of marriage? What business is it of yours is they use birth control? What business is it of yours if they choose to terminate a pregnancy in their own bodies? Why don't YOU stay out of everyone else's business?
June 18th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
Student,
You're right, there is something of a double standard here, but I'd say it's a morally justifiable one.
Obviously, if you're the German hiding the Jews from the SS soldiers, lying is morally justifiable, though otherwise it would be immoral to lie, right?
Considered from the pro-life point of view, we have a very similar situation on our hands. Millions of people are being murdered under a guise of legality. We pro-life folks feel that something must be done to stop it and that one of the best ways to change people's minds is to show them what abortion actually looks like.
Now, I can't speak for every pro-lifer, but showing people gruesome pictures is not one of my hobbies for its own sake. In fact, while I wouldn't call it "immoral" necessarily, I understand people's outrage at seeing the pictures, especially if they've been caught unawares. But the fact remains that the pictures save lives. Mothers and fathers change their minds about getting abortions after seeing them. It's a fact I've seen several times with my own eyes.
So, weighing the possibility of committing the slight moral offense of upsetting someone or making them lose their appetite against the possibility saving even one innocent human being from murder, I'm probably going to be willing to upset a few people.
Double standard? Sure. But a morally justifiable one if the pro-life position is accurate.
June 18th, 2008 at 9:01 pm
Sorry, Matt, that just doesn't fly. Perhaps if you were simply talking about showing the photos around PP….although even then I don't consider it appropriate. However, you cross the line when you FORCE them on children getting out of school and then turn around and complain about a site at a library that nobody is FORCING children to look at.
Personally, I find religion to be one of the more evil things in the world. I know we very much disagree on this. Given my feelings, would it be "morally justifiable" for me to stand outside of your church/home/school with giant photos showing graphic pictures of people killed in the name of religion? How about giant signs that read "Your Parents Lie To You?"
What you have done is inappropriate and there is no justifiable excuse for it.
June 18th, 2008 at 9:10 pm
Excuse me??!? You, the ones who want to stick your noses into everyone else's business? What business is it of yours if someone has sex outside of marriage? What business is it of yours is they use birth control? What business is it of yours if they choose to terminate a pregnancy in their own bodies? Why don't YOU stay out of everyone else's business?
I don't stick my nose into anyone else's business. If you want to have sex outside of marriage, bully for you. Whether or not I want to raise my kids that way is my business, and I don't appreciate interlopers trying to tell them how to do it (and yes, Planned Parenthood is trying to stick their nose in based on the quote I noted elsewhere).
I don't advocate making birth control illegal. I do think abortion should be illegal because it's taking a life. That is my business.
I know that I'm inundated with a culture saturated in sex, and if I want to opt out of it, don't blame me for trying to get away. I think sex is healthy, but check out the lyrics of the number one song, Lollipop. Good luck trying to raise a moral child in this sewer.
And student, I didn't spit anything. You and the Prof are friends, right?
I wasn't joking in the first sentence you quoted. I also don't agree with the truth tours (as you may have noted). But I don't agree that the government should treat Planned Parenthood as a dispassionate source of information. It has an agenda, and one I disagree with. The government shouldn't endorse PP and it shouldn't give it a dime.
June 18th, 2008 at 9:16 pm
By the way, I don't think anyone is advocating that teenwire should be banned from the public library, just that it not be linked as a recommended resource. Such a link is an endorsement. I'm sure you'd be up in arms if the library linked to a religious oriented site. That's the difference that I see. If a teen goes to the library (thank God if they do), I don't object to them taking it upon themselves to go to teenwire. I object to the government saying this is the source for information. If you can't see that distinction, if you can't see that PP is an ideological organization, I don't know what to tell you.
June 18th, 2008 at 9:29 pm
"I love your double standard."
I love your faux-can't we all just get along and try to minimize abortion attituded while simultaneously volunteering for blood merchants. Why should you wish to minimize abortions if it's just a routine medical procedure that has no moral, physical or mental health implications?
June 18th, 2008 at 10:21 pm
Some of the posts criticize websites that espouse Catholic teachings about sexuality, as if that automatically disqualifies those sites. I suppose we could spend years talking about what constitutes beautiful and holy expressions of sexuality and never come to agreement. Such is the nature of the subject.
For critics of Catholic teaching on sex I would caution that it would be unfair to summarize those teachings from a strictly negative perspective, as if the church forbids any and all things sexual, except of course the mischaracterization that the church demands we be pregnant at all times. It seems everybody thinks themselves an expert on Catholicism and all of its teachings. Actually, in contrast to what has been reported about the church's uptightness about sex, a visitor to Rome might be surprised at the celebration of the human form found in many of the paintings from Catholic artists over the centuries, in works often commissioned by the church. And sculptures seen in the Vatican and surrounding museums leave little to the imagination. Prudishness was not a hang-up for many of these artists, nor for that matter is prudishness a Catholic virtue.
What IS properly a Catholic expression of virtue is a sense of modesty and self control as found in the balance between suggestive dress and behavior on the one extreme and puritanism on the other extreme. On this and in most things the church is usually a middle ground between "isms." That we (and not only "we" but most Christian denominations) teach sex should be saved for marriage is a direct reflection of our Savior's admonitions and teachings.
Another theme that frequently surfaces on this blog is that kids need more and more info so as to keep themselves out of trouble, and so on. It just seems so unlikely that this is the case. Some 40 years since the beginning of significant sex ed classroom instruction and frankness about sex on TV, movies, magazines, and you name it, we find ourselves in an STD crisis: One in four teen girls has had or currently suffers from an STD.
One would think that with all of this knowledge this would not be happening, but the incidence of teen STDs is worse now than it has ever been. So the solution really is not more numerous and more explicit web sites etc., rather the answer lies in better behaviors and a renewed sense of what is healthy and wholesome. To this end authentic religious values can and should play a huge role in bringing us back to our senses.
June 18th, 2008 at 11:05 pm
Thank you Jerry! Wonderfully said. God Bless, karen k.
June 18th, 2008 at 11:36 pm
Really? Then you're not one of the people picketing outside of PP and yelling at women regardless of whether or not they are there for an abortion, birth control pills or a routine medical exam? If not, you have my sincere apology.
I'm glad to hear it. Does that include the pill as well?
Thinking it should be illegal and attempting to get the law changed is certainly your business. I fully support your right to do that. Harrassing women attempting to get healthcare or even those having an abortion performed is NOT your business.
I'll admit I'm not familiar with that song — we don't listen to much popular music, nor do we watch much television. In fact, I don't recall the last time the sole TV we own was on in our home. I do agree that we are inundated in sexuality which, in my opinion, is all the more reason to make sure our kids know the facts about same. Europe does a significantly better job of educating its youth and their abortion, STI and teen pregnancy rates are significantly less than ours.
Yes, we certainly are. However, we are not the only people on this Forum with a similar opinion. You did spit the word "friend."
I realize that….which is what I find so outlandish.
Truthfully, I hadn't noticed that but am glad to hear it. Out of curiosity, how do you feel about these images being in front of your children?
The government endorses and finances many things I don't agree. Yes, PP has an agenda. I believe that agenda is to provide accurate information and low cost medical services. However, if there is another entity that does the same thing, I would be happy to support them as well.
Actually, you're wrong about that. I do not see it as an endorsement. Further, if the library linked to a particular religious site that was good information about Christianity, Islam, Wicca or any other religion I would have no problem with it. Libraries make recommendations as to where to find information. That is their business.
Why do you think it's a faux attitude? I have no financial interest in abortion and sincerely would like to reduce the number performed. I volunteer for PP primarily because when I was younger and attempting to access birth control I had to walk through a crowd of people just like you. The yelling, taunting, rudeness, etc. is something no young woman should have to endure. Women entering PP shouldn't have to deal with protesters any more than women attempting to get dental care. You have no idea what service any particular woman entering that clinic is getting and the judgmental attitude is offensive. If I can be a buffer to that, I am happy to do it.
June 19th, 2008 at 7:50 am
"Really? Then you're not one of the people picketing outside of PP and yelling at women regardless of whether or not they are there for an abortion, birth control pills or a routine medical exam? If not, you have my sincere apology."
Actually, I'm not out there, and I know your apology isn't sincere. When I've been there, I've seen people asked if they want information. If that counts as harassment, you're too thin skinned.
"I'm glad to hear it. Does that include the pill as well?"
Sure. I don't think it should be illegal even if it can cause abortion.
"Harrassing women attempting to get healthcare or even those having an abortion performed is NOT your business."
Attempting to stop abortion, whether through the political process or through peaceful protest, is within the business of an engaged citizen. I just disagree with you.
"I do agree that we are inundated in sexuality which, in my opinion, is all the more reason to make sure our kids know the facts about same."
Or the reason to opt out and to get the pushy people like the folks at PP out of our face.
"I volunteer for PP primarily because when I was younger and attempting to access birth control I had to walk through a crowd of people just like you."
Just like me, huh? What a silly statement. Go to the drug store and fill your prescription and quit pretending to be a martyr.
June 19th, 2008 at 8:30 am
Midnightcyn says:
“Karen K, Toynbee died in 1975, before gay marriage was ever an issue, and this quote dates before Roe v Wade.”
Actually, Roe vs. Wade was decided Jan. 22, 1973
When I responded to your statement I was rushing and did not catch that. Our country is already suffering from the affects of its moral decline, and I predict much more is to come.
June 19th, 2008 at 9:22 am
"Judge not lest ye be judged" The only ones who appear to be judgmental are those who are anti-choice."Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" The stones being thrown are in the form of bigger than life size pictures that are grotesque and men and women who feel hey have a right to tell other people what to do.If you are going to quote the bible stop being hypocritical.
June 19th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
No, if you're not out there then I do owe you an apology — and it is sincere, regardless of what you may think.
When I've been there (and it has been several months), I've seen people yelling, walking 1/2-way across the road and, on one occasion, heard a man yelling baby killer at a young woman going in for birth control pills. For the record, I'm far from thin-skinned and I am not the one being harassed — the harassment is to the women entering the clinic. As to what counts as harassment, I'd go with Webster's definition: "to disturb persistently; torment, as with troubles or cares; bother continually; pester; persecute."
Again, glad to hear it. However, if you think abortion is murder and think the pill causes abortion I don't understand your rationale.
Fair enough.
And on this I just disagree with you. I see it as a reason to act as a buffer between the protesters and the patients at the clinic.
If you're not one of them, my apology.
I have no idea what prescription you're referencing unless it's nothing more than your way of taking a shot. If so and it makes you feel better, knock yourself out. I don't get why you think I'm pretending to be or am a martyr. I certainly don't see myself in that light at all. Like you, I'm doing what I believe to be the right thing.
June 19th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
If you read the post, Midnightcyn claimed that the statement you referenced was uttered prior to RvW.
June 19th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
The pill is legal and is going to remain legal. It's intended purpose is to prevent pregnancy. I understand that it can cause abortion, but that is generally not the intent. Accordingly, I draw the line there. Perfect consistency? No, but from a political and practical point of view, it is what it is.
As to going to the drugstore and the martyr, I was making reference to you going to get birth control pills (as referenced in your previous post).
June 19th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
Ok, I appreciate your honesty. Do you feel the same way about the morning after pill?
That was over 20 years ago and, fortunately, I have the luxury of no longer needing birth control.
June 19th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Brian,
Pp doesn't get a dme to perform abortions; many of its clinics aren't even set up to perform them. They do get money because they are a good, low-cost health resource for women who cannot afford the costs of regular medical testing. For many women, this is the ONLY way they can get mammograms, pap smears, etc. Moreover, they are also a great resource for prenatal care to ensure that women who choose to carry the pregnancy can stay strong and deliver healthy babies.
As a non-profit, it has to keep scrupulous books concerning its funding. Money from the government goes strictly to the practical side, not to the abortion side.
June 19th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
Karen, I know precisely when RvW was decided, and the QUOTE precedes that decision. Toynbee himself died afterward.
June 19th, 2008 at 1:56 pm
Money is fungible.
June 19th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
I am disturbed at the idea of "engaged citizens" believing that they know what is best for other citizens. In point of fact, these patients have a perfect right to privacy, which extends to their personal medical care.
In the past, "engaged citizens" reported their neighbors as witches, did what they could to make sure that blacks kept away from white people, caused them to be fired if they thought someone was a commie or a homosexual, etc. There is no difference between bind an engaged citizen and a vigilante.
Pretending that you know what is best for a woman entering a clinic when you don't even know why they are there is ridiculous and indefensible.
BTW–most of the pictures used by such groups are bogus; they are usually pictures taken of miscarried mid-term fetuses removed to save the life of the woman. They are far more advanced in development than a 12-week or younger fetus. How noble can a cause be if you have to lie to make your point?
June 19th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
I'm assuming "dme" is "dime"…
In 2004 PPFA performed 255,015 abortions which generated income of nearly $95 million. (This information was obtained from PPFA annual reports and website.)
The "clinics" that are not set up to perform abortions are required to refer for abortions. They are satellite office that feed into the larger ones, although PP seems to be consolidating.
God Bless,
Roger
June 19th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Roger, Do you have a link where I could check out this information? I looked at the 2005-2006 Annual Report and didn't see anything at all like this. Thanks!
June 19th, 2008 at 5:54 pm
Is there a site you WOULD consider appropriate that includes comprehensive sex education? Anything at all? If so, I'd love to see it.
Student,
Here it is…
http://www.pureloveclub.com/seminars/index.php?id=3
Mike
June 19th, 2008 at 10:01 pm
Student,
On the above link I would recommend listening to all the talks on this webpage. If you don't have time to listen to all of them at the very least listen to the "Catholic High School Talk" and fast forward to the ONE HOUR mark and listen for 10-15 minutes. These talks are unbelievable and changing many teens views on sex whenever they are given.
Thank You.
Mike
June 19th, 2008 at 10:33 pm
I thought this is something everyone should take a look at…
——-
Sexual Exposure Chart
http://pureloveclub.com/chastity/index.php?id=7&entryid=200
June 19th, 2008 at 10:50 pm
I listened to the part of the Catholic High School talk you suggested, and truthfully, it was a bunch of hooey.
First, he identifies sleeping together before marriage as a lie. He justifies this by saying that sleeping together is saying that 'you are completely committed to each other'. This, of course, need not be the case. I have had wonderful sexual relationships where the concept of long-term commitment was rejected by both of us. It was still a good thing. The key is COMMUNICATION. Does everyone involved know where they stand and are they honest?
Second, I question his statistics about divorce after living together. Let's face it, about half of all marriages fail for one reason or another. The most common reason is finances, not sex. The second most common reason is infidelity (in other words, dishonesty). I would MUCH rather my daughter, for example, live with someone before she marries than to marry as a virgin with no experience living with another person.
Third, his information on STDs is, at best, distorted. While most sexually active people do have HPV, only certain strains lead to cervical cancer or warts. Those strains can be vaccinated against. But, interestingly enough, that vaccination is also condemned by the very people using scare tactics about sexuality. Most of the strains of HPV are dealt with by the immune system within a year with NO side effects. Is HPV a danger? You bet! Should people be more educated about it and its effects? Of course. But scare tactics are not the way to do this.
Then he identifies birth control with lack of self-control. Again, this is simply foolish. Sex is something that healthy, normal people desire. If done responsibly, honestly, and with education, it is a wonderful way to deepen relationships (even those that are not permanent). Regular sex leads to better mental health. Also, birth control is FAR from being the same as sterilization. The difference, in case you don't get it, is that sterilization is permanent. The speaker seems to miss this subtlety. Finally, sterilization (a perfectly good form of permanent birth control) is not the same as neutering. I have had a vasectomy, so pregnancy is not a risk when I have sex, but I still have my testicles. Big difference.
In general, this guy comes across like someone who has OCD that has to wash their hands compulsively because of fear of contamination. He overestimates the risks and minimizes the benefits of a good, healthy sex life without the risks of pregnancy. With distorted views like his, it is no wonder to me that programs like this fail when the kids realize they have been lied to.
June 20th, 2008 at 8:05 am
Isn't education about sex and birth control better than an unwanted pregnancy?If a man or woman or both use protection during sex the result is no pregnancy and no need to even consider abortion.You will never be able to stop anyone including teens from having sex outside of marriage,yet you don't condone educating teens or anyone else for that matter with what is truthful information.Your idea of sex ed is DON'T DO "IT".That sure makes me think twice about having sex with my boyfriend.NOT!You need to face this century with an open mind and realize that society is alot different now than it was 40 years ago.With the issue of STD's teens need to know the facts not the old fasioned "Wait till you get married it will be wonderful" attitude that you deem appropriate.Without the "in your face" truth, teens will be going into it with their eyes closed.Don't force them to find out the hard way that not only do you not want to educate them but then you want to meet them outside of planned parenthood and show them a picture of a fetus.Why dont you just tell people that your sorry you didn't want to teach them with any possible means but now you want to make them live with the responsibilities that only someone who is prepared for should have.If you think about it you are probably one of the main causes for unwanted pregnancy because you don't want to tell the truth.An ounce of prevention(birth control)is worth a pound of cure(abortion) Think about it
June 20th, 2008 at 8:54 am
" The key is COMMUNICATION"
—————————-
I beg to disagree…The key is COMMITMENT first (you know, the marriage VOWS do mean something to some people, obviously not you liberal, left leaning,pro-abort radicals) and THEN communication comes next.
If you go into marriage w/ the thought of divorcing/ separating later if finances, bad sex, kids, career, etc..HARDSHIPS/dificulties come your way..then your marriage is DOOMED from the start.
You and your ilk has turned the beautiful gift of selfless marriage and union into something selfish, self-centered, for-my-own-sexual-gratification, living-together w/ no responsibilities "thing".
June 20th, 2008 at 9:45 am
HUH?The key word is "some" people.Most don't put alot of thought into marriage before they do sex.Communication should come first above all else.
June 20th, 2008 at 10:14 am
Kathy says:
"Most don't put alot of thought into marriage before they do sex."
What a sad statement. And a sign of our times. Most people do not put alot of thought to alot of things they should! That is what the problem is. People run with their emotions. And emotions change from day to day, sometimes from minute to minute. Yes, love for another has an emotional aspect to it, most definitely, but the emotions have to be put into check with a conscious decision as to what and why they feel the way they do about "this person". Why is there such a high divorce rate? Because the idea of living together does not work. Why? Because you cannot practice permanent commitment ahead of time. Compatibility comes with commitment.
Also, Being a Christian, I believe one should look for people who will help them get to Heaven, not pull them in the other direction. And the main aspect of love, and the love that lasts in all relatiionships, be it, with your husband or wife or with just a friend, is a virtuous relationship. Those are the ones that last. Why, because you truly care for one another, because the highest and greatest gift you can give another is wanting them to go to Heaven.
June 20th, 2008 at 11:03 am
I consider it a FAR worse thing that people don't put more thought into having children than they do as opposed to simply having sex. Yes, many people put too little thought into either one. But the damage done by irresponsibly having children when not prepared is immense. The damage from having otherwise responsible sex is rather minimal. I would much rather people have protected, honest sex, whether in or out of marriage than to have a horde of children without previously thinking deeply about how to raise them. We have FAR too many un-parents.
I strongly disagree that commitment comes before communication. Communication and honesty should be the basis of any relationship right from the beginning, whether it develops into a long-term commitment or not or even whether it becomes sexual or not. It is only through honest, open communication about desires, needs, and preferences that we can hope to form any type of real bond with another. If the relationship does become sexual, communication makes sure that everyone is on the same page. If it does lead to marriage, communication makes sure that everyone has the same goals in mind. If the people in a marriage decide to divorce, communication prevents the divorce from becoming destructive to all involved. And if the relationship stays at the friendship level, communication bonds the friends together.
June 20th, 2008 at 11:38 am
Very well said Professor
June 20th, 2008 at 11:55 am
Really? Wow! I always thought that one had to be able to communicate before committing to someone.
I don't recall anyone saying that they didn't mean something to some people. Which post are you referring to?
Gee, I would have thought this would violate the terms of the board.
How? Specifics please? How does my living with someone affect "the beautiful gift of selfless marriage?" Am I somehow interferring with yours?
June 20th, 2008 at 12:27 pm
Kathy,
Very well said!
June 20th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
"…you cannot practice permanent commitment ahead of time."
——————————————-
Amen, Karen.
Their so-called "relationship" is based on satisfying their own needs and wants…and when those personal needs and wants are no longer able to be satisfied by their current partner…they go looking out for another one..and another..and another….and the deadly cycle begins again…
June 20th, 2008 at 1:16 pm
I hate to say it, but you can try and justify your position here til Kingdom come, and that is just it, God, whether you can believe it or not gave us all the answers to what is right and wrong, Telling otherwise is just a way of justifying sin. When people do not listen to the Wisdom of God, they hurt themselves and all those around them. It is amazing to me that people actually think they are smarter and wiser than the one who created them. But that is how we got in trouble in the first place, will we ever learn?
Yes, some will, some will go to Heaven and others choose eternal damnation.
If you don't think there is a God, you better hope you are a 100% right!!Because what if you are wrong? If believers are wrong they are still in no danger, but if you are wrong that is a position you will have to face, and I for one would not want to be in. Also as I pray and learn about God, I do not react out of fear as much as seeing the great love He has for us, and in turn, I want to love and honor Him, because He is all deserving of our love. We are His children, show love and respect to your Father.
“Father forgive them for they know not what they do”, Jesus
June 20th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
Professor,
I'm sorry you have never experienced a committed, permanent, married relationship. Given your experiences, you cannot comprehend what you have missed. Unfortunately, this society sets up our young people for the same loss. This is perhaps one of the greatest tragedies of the "sexual revolution".
Without the commitment and total self-giving that sex within marriage is meant to represent, the sexual act loses its meaning and dehumanizes the people involved. It becomes selfish and self-serving, appealing to base, animalistic instinct. Notice the "I" in "I have had wonderful sexual relationships." Would the women you have used say the same? You talk about "deepening" the relationship. What purpose does that serve? Where did that "deeper" relationship lead? Marriage, with a commitment to love and stand by each other till death? Or anger and heartbreak for at least one of you, when you no longer desire to stay together and want to try another person? People become disposable–"sex partners"-instead of the unique, irreplaceable persons they were created to be by God.
And I'm sorry for your daughter, who because of your misunderstandings may never know the protective love a father could and should provide. There's a reason for the stereotype of the father holding a shotgun while waiting for the boyfriend to bring his daughter home. It's called LOVE.
"Regular sex leads to better mental health." ?? Really?? Tell that to the teenagers who have tried to commit or have committed suicide because of a broken relationship. Sex DOES create deeper ties, and the pain that follows the severing of those ties can be unbearable for many people.
Going on, you say, "While most sexually active people do have HPV, only certain strains lead to cervical cancer or warts. Those strains can be vaccinated against."
Check your facts. You are incorrect. The 4 strains covered by the vaccine are thought to be responsible for only 70% of the cancers. What about the other 30%? And the vaccine is dangerous. Numerous deaths already having been attributed to it, causing some states to withdraw their mandates or mandate consideration. And condoms have never been shown to protect against HPV.
By wishing promiscuity on your daughter, you are wishing to expose her to an early death.
June 20th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
Yes, actually. I remain friends with most of my lovers. I strongly disagree that sex outside of marriage 'dehumanizes' those involved. For example, my partner and I are not married, and do not ever intend to become married. We see no reason for the government to get involved with our relationship. And yet, we are committed to each other. We love each other, value the happiness and well-being of the other and BECAUSE of this, do not want to get married. We also have sex. Regularly. But we also have no intention to have children together. That is a choice both of us have made and discussed together. So I have had a vasectomy. That is responsibility. It also allows us to enjoy our sexuality and the wonderful addition it makes to our relationship without having to worry about the pill, condoms, etc.
Again, you completely misunderstand the dynamics. I'll use the example of my second marriage. My ex and I are still very good friends. We were very happily married for many years. But then it became clear to *both* of us that the marriage wasn't working. We had different goals and different dreams (many of which we didn't realize when we got married). While separation was painful in many ways, it was also what was best for both of us (as well as our daughter). My is re-married to someone who is more in line with what she wants out of life. I am in a wonderful relationship which is more appropriate for me. BOTH of us are better off. So was it selfish of us to divorce? I'd say it would have been stupid for us not to. We could have ended up like way too many people: in a loveless marriage that made both of us miserable. To stay in the marriage would have made the world a slightly worse place. As it is, our divorce made it a better place for not just us but for those we have met and also for our daughter.
Thinking of sex as solely a 'base, animalistic instinct' shows a deep-seated negative view of sexuality. I see it, instead, as a beautiful way to share with another person. You seem to see sex outside of marriage as being self-centered. Again, this can be the case, but it need not. It can also be wonderfully other-centered. THAT is how relationships are deepened. People feel closer to each other, feel happier with themselves and the world and THAT is a good thing in my mind.
Not any more than friends are 'disposable'. Like I said, my ex and I are very good friends even 10 years after our divorce. I am friends with most of my previous sex partners. In no way do I consider any of them 'disposable'. Perhaps *you* are the one with an unhealthy attitude towards the possibilities people offer you.
No more than my wishing her to learn how to drive is wishing for an early death. What I want for her is to grow to be a happy, healthy adult that can deal honestly with other people, who knows her body and how to share it with those she cares for enough to do so. I want her to know the possibilities of sexuality, both positive and negative. I want her to know that sex means much more than intercourse and that giving another pleasure can be a wonderful aspect to a good relationship. Sexuality is part of this. Not all of it, of course, but an important part.
June 20th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
Midnightcyn says,
Of the civilizations that did collapse, most did so from military issues or from the result of famine. Rome fell, interestingly enough, because it overextended its resources and because it adopted Christianity as its official religion, destabilizing the basis of having a caesar to begin with.
June 18th, 2008 at 7:27 am
“Moral disorder is the root cause of all disorder”, Father Corapi
June 20th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
You seem to miss the difference between love and wanting to own someone. Fathers like this are simply jerks.
June 20th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
Karen K,
You speak as though you have a direct line to GOD?What about all those people who proclaim the word of GOD in church and then molest the altar boy.They claim GOD speaks through them also.I have no use for what they have to say.How many people that have given their life to GOD have in turn sinned in ways that the average man would rather die than commit?You can interperate the bible any way YOU want because there are plenty of ways to interperate it.What is to say your right.You sound like a very hypocritical woman who thinks that she can tell everyone that if they don't live according to her "rules" then they are condemned to eternal damnation.Well what makes you think you are better than anyone else.who are you to decide for all women what they should or should not do with their own bodies?If you want to tell your children what they can or cannot do,fine,but you have no right to try to preach to people and cause them to do something that they may regret for the rest of their lives.After all your only role is to cause the problem not deal with it.Not all women want children but most enjoy sex.They deserve to protect themselves any way they choose.You don't believe in sex outside of marriage?Then don't do it!
June 20th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
So here is the consequence of telling kids how wonderful it is to be a parent:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7464925.stm
These girls live in a Catholic community. They are pregnant not because birth control failed or because sex ed failed, but because they thought that pregnancy was a good way to become adults. They knew exactly what they wanted and went out to get it. By one report, the man for several of these pregnancies is a homeless guy.
Do you think perhaps we could let kids know that having kids isn't a wonderful experience as a teenager?? Can anyone here say that these girls are better off than they would have been if they had boyfriends and used contraception? Or lived in a culture that didn't extol the virtues of pregnancy and child-rearing? And, just to make a point, would it be any better if they were married? They would still lose their lives to bringing up a kid rather than learning and improving themselves.
June 20th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion.”
~Steven Weinberg~
"The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as His father, in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter."
~Thomas Jefferson~
June 20th, 2008 at 5:24 pm
"How many people that have given their life to GOD have in turn sinned in ways that the average man would rather die than commit?"
No one is immune to sin.
The best way to "try" and destroy the church is from within. That is why when priests or people who are representing God, when they commit such evil acts, and disobey God, they cause great harm and scandal. They though, no longer represent God. They have sinned against God and His Church. They may claim to still represent God, but through there evil acts that is no longer possible.
"You can interperate the bible any way YOU want"
I try to follow the teachings of the Catholic Church; I do not need to interpret the Bible on my own. The church was set up by Jesus and taught to us through His apostles and the forefathers,and is guided by the Holy Spirit.
"there are plenty of ways to interpert it. What is to say your right."
That is why Jesus set up His Church, because there are many ways to interpert the Bible.
"You sound like a very hypocritical woman who thinks that she can tell everyone that if they don't live according to her "rules" then they are condemned to eternal damnation. Well what makes you think you are better than anyone else."
"her rules" again they are not my rules, and I never claimed that they were. I absolutely do not think I am better than anyone else. I am a sinner, "by the grace of God go I."
"you have no right to try to preach to people"
Jesus said to go out and be fishers of men, love your neighbor as yourself. I am trying to live as Jesus said. You do not have to be perfect to help others to know and love Jesus so they can get to Heaven.
"They deserve"
Everything is given to us by God, we do not deserve anything. We are to serve and not be served. The very next breathe you and I take is a gift from God.
"You don't believe in sex outside of marriage? Then don't do it!"
Because you were created by God, I care for you and hope you can come to understand the ways of Our Lord, so you can have eternal happiness in Heaven when you die. It is ultimately up to you, no one can make you, you have your own free will, but at least you were given the opportunity to hear what Jesus says.
I fear to hear the words from Our Lord," What did YOU do for your brethren?" Wouldn't Jesus think it selfish of me to not have shared what He taught? Especially when He commanded it?
I think this conversation belongs in the Forum.
June 20th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
Student,
Here's the link to PP's 2007 Annual Report.
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/AR_2007_vFinal.pdf
It lists there abortion numbers for both '06 and '07 on pg. 6.
As for the profit, ahem, income for '07, that info is all on pg. 17.
Hope that helps!
June 20th, 2008 at 6:31 pm
Thanks, Matt. I will definitely take a look at it.
June 20th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
In link #82 It should say,
"There but for the grace of God go I." I've spent too much time on this computer, so long for now:)
June 20th, 2008 at 6:53 pm
Did anyone else see the story of the Massachusetts town, highly Catholic, where 17 high school girls decided to get pregnant? There were others that were *disappointed* that they didn't get pregnant! According to one report, several of them used a homeless man for the insemination.
This was not a birth control failure. It was not the product of sex ed. It was a bunch of high schoolers that have been told repeatedly how wonderful having a child is and they decided they wanted it. Where do they get this idea? How about from PL films like 'Juno'? How about from a religion that emphasizes having children as the epitome of what a woman can achieve? How about a culture that considers birth control as dangerous but of having a child as something that requires almost no thought at all?
Yes, I know they were unmarried. But would it really be that much better if 17 teenage girls got pregnant after getting married? They would still be losing their freedom by having kids while they are kids. They would still lose many chances at education (no, not all) because they have to focus on child care. And they would still be living in a pathetically narrow-minded world where pro-creation is the only real goal for women (oh, wait, they could also be celibate).
June 21st, 2008 at 8:55 am
Would you include not only the pedophile priests but, more importantly, the higher ups in the church who covered up the abuse and transferred these "priests" to other parishes where they continued their abuse?
I have to say, I still very much agree with Weinberg: "Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion.”
And if the Catholic Church has interpreted the bible incorrectly, then what? After all, it is made up of mere mortals who are not immune to error. This sounds more like an excuse NOT to think, which is one of the biggest problems with religion.
Catholics think they KNOW the only way. Pentecostals think they KNOW the only way. Baptists think they KNOW the only way. Mormons think they KNOW the only way.
Muslims think they KNOW the only way. Sorry, somebody MUST be wrong.
And I was taught as a child that Jesus did not condone the Catholic church. I was taught that Catholics and Jews, in particular, where on a one way path to hell. For the record, I don't believe that any more than I do any other religious construct.
They are the "rules" you have chosen to live by. You have no way of proving that they are the only ones or even the correct ones.
Jesus supposedly said a lot of things. Do you following all of his dictates? Wasn't it Jesus who said "Whoever curses father or mother must certainly be put to death." Would you really kill one of your children for swearing at you. That seems pretty severe……maybe I'm too lenient, but I'd just ground mine or take away some privilege that they really cared about.
Nonsense. Prove it.
No, I was created because my mother and father had sex. It's really a pretty simple concept.
“Judge not, and you shall not be judged. Condemn not, and you shall not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven. Give, and it will be given back to you: good measure, pressed down, shaken together, and running over will be put into your bosom. For with the same measure that you use, it will be measured back to you.” (Luke 6: 37-38)
June 21st, 2008 at 9:13 am
See this is what happens when you tie religion too much to your public stance on being pro-life.
you get arguments about religion and the bible on a website that really has little to do with religion.
Why can't we be truly, wholly, and completely pro-life because it's the right thing to do, not because it's a facet of our religion?
Our own religions aren't universal to everyone on this website/in aurora/in the U.S, but doing the right thing is.
June 21st, 2008 at 9:37 am
Very well put Student (not studentfl) I could not have said it better.If only,Karen, you would face the reality that your interpretation of religion could be wrong then you would realize that you could have been wrong this whole time.When you translate into english something that was written in an entirely different language,sometimes things get misinterperated in the translation or "lost".So whos to say whos right and whos wrong?You yourself could be teaching something that is purely wrong in the eyes of your GOD.After all,as student says,all religions interperate the bible different,so whos right?Unfortunately some people are so narrow minded that they refuse to admit that they could be wrong.As a sinner yourself,how can you point your finger at anyone for sinning.That is hypocritical and a sin in itself.
June 21st, 2008 at 2:42 pm
I do not have time right now to talk, I am getting ready for my daughters graduation party. But, I do want to say one thing before I go. Life is precious and defending it is what all humans should do no matter who you are or what religion you are or no religion at all. I do also believe the evil one is lurking about between us enjoying this very much. Also I want to tell you that with all your accusations I hold no hard feelings. We are all in this world together, and no one gets out of here alive:) peace, Karen
June 21st, 2008 at 3:10 pm
congratulations to your daughter!!:)
June 21st, 2008 at 3:56 pm
KarenK,
I don't think anyone has made "accusations" but, rather, have given their opinions. They simply differ from yours.
Kathy,
StudentFL is one of the nicer, more thoughtful people you will encounter in this forum. While I disagree with some of his opinions, I think he honestly is trying to find solutions and not point out the evils of others.
June 21st, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Nothing against studentfl,just wanted to specify who I was referring to.
June 21st, 2008 at 11:09 pm
Studentfl has the right idea however. Only theres too much religion in anti-choice pro-life.But that seems to be alot of peoples reason for being their opinion.
June 21st, 2008 at 11:17 pm
I do agree with StudentFl this blog is not for long religious discussions. The topic is PP and their teenwire website being a direct link from the public library for Batavia teens (which indeed is an endorsement of this organization). I think we should stick with that topic because so many pro-aborts will use this type of forum to get you off topic so that the logic of the discussion becomes lost. I think they enjoy pulling the chain of prolifers in this way to make it seem that we are trying to ram religion down the throat of others. In actuality, you do not need a religious argument at all, when you are dealing with one of the most divisive, controversial organizations in this nation like PP that makes millions of dollars off of encouraging risky sexual activity by teens and adults, there is a very good reason to protect our teens from them. I will say after spending considerable time checking out their website, I would NOT endorse it to ANY teen because articles like "Foreplay 411", "Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Not Doing It" and "Worth A Dam" promote all kinds of risky sexual activity. They lower the standard for teens instead of raising the standard, when teens are already reaping the results of the "sexual revolution" of the 1970's with over 25 different STDs today and the epidemic of over 52,000 cases of STDs per day in the US. If condom usage were the answer the numbers of STDs should have stabilized or dropped not skyrocketed over the last 20 years,(skin to skin transmission because only one area of males is covered, among other reasons).
Adults who are refuse to curb their own sexual appetites is tragic enough but it is their own decision, however when we are talking about immpressionable, underage minors who need and deserve guidance and encouragement to make the safest, healthiest choices and to know how valuable they are that is another matter. The research is solid and irrefutable of what will keep our teens SAFE (www.medinstitute.org, http://www.stdepidemic.com, http://www.teenpregnancy.org, etc. listed in my previous post). No matter how many times you give the evidence pro-aborts will not receive it because they will continue to justify the killing of our children born and unborn, along with ruining their physical, emotional and mental health. Although all of the pro-aborts are dearly loved by God and are so valuable to Him, they reject Him and his teachings, they have been given by Him the free will to do so.
June 22nd, 2008 at 11:00 pm
Let's face it. The problem the protesters have with teenwire is not that it promotes risky behavior. It's that it takes a positive view of sexuality at all. The problem is that this site recognizes that teens DO have sex, have ALWAYS had sex, and will always have sex. The only real difference is that getting pregnant is no longer a formula for getting married like it was in the 1950s. So the site wants to prevent teen pregnancy and transmission of STDs, while the protesters want to shame and condemn those who have sex. By having their primary approach to sexuality being a negative, morality based approach, the protesters marginalize themselves and put teens at risk by condemning the information these teens desperately need.
June 23rd, 2008 at 7:36 am
Educator,
Most people find the word pro-abort offensive. Not only is it offensive, it is inaccurate. I am pro-CHOICE, not pro-abort. I am no more pro-abortion than I am pro-birth or pro-adoption. I refrain from using words like, nuts, crazies, Talibangelists, etc. to describe people with different opinions and would appreciate it if you could do the same.
June 23rd, 2008 at 7:51 am
Ad long as we keep makeing teens feel that sex is something that is shameful or should not be done until marriage the more they are likely to try it.Face it,when you keep telling a child not to do something,the more likely they are to rebel and do it anyway.Wouldn't it be better to have them well informed so they can make the sensible choice to use protection that while not 100% safe is still safer then none at all?Teens are teens and naturally they think they are grown.They think they know it all until they are faced with a pregnancy.If they are not ready or old enough or just don't want a child,then they should be aware of all of their options and be allowed to make their CHOICE.With no interference from pro-choice or anti-choice.And just for the record educator,I do not reject GOD,I accept him whole heartedly!I just believe that he is not so cruel that he would cause a pregnancy when the child, that is brought into this world after 9 months, will only suffer from neglect,abuse etc…
June 23rd, 2008 at 8:53 am
Kathy,
Good post. Please read
http://tinyurl.com/4prs3l
June 23rd, 2008 at 10:20 am
Professor,
Your story about the teen girls trying to get pregnant doesn't even contain the word Catholic. Where did you get the impression they're Catholic?
Even if they are, they're acting directly contrary to every aspect of Catholic teaching on sexuality, including its attitudes and emphases. That's not the Church's fault in any way.
Btw, if you're interested, I've started a thread in the forum in the Foundations of Faith section entitled "Catholic Teaching on Sexuality". I'd like to get the religion discussion off the non-religious thread, but I'm really interested in picking your brain on this.
Thanks,
Matt
June 23rd, 2008 at 12:07 pm
Matt,
I can't speak for Professor, however, the story I heard on NPR did reference that it is a "very Catholic town." Now, having said that, it doesn't necessarily mean that the girls in question were Catholic.
On another note, thank you again for providing the link on the financial statement. I didn't see anything that linked profits to abortion specifically. How did you arrive at that conclusion?
June 23rd, 2008 at 12:12 pm
Some teens are going to be involved in risky behaviors that can hurt or kill them. I will say it again, there is NO OTHER area of health or safety education where responsible adults would PROMOTE anything less than the safest, healthiest behavior. Teaching teens "since I know you have no self-control WHEN you drink, do drugs, drink and drive, speed, etc…". Fact: over 90% of teens want a strong abstinence message. Fact: parents who are connected to their teen and are hands-on reduce their risk of involvement in all risky behaviors. Parents are supposed to be the guardians and protectors of their children, unfortunately many have relegated their responsiblity. Fact: Most teens have NOT had sex by the time they graduate H.S., this number has declined along with the teen birth and abortion rates in the last decade that the abstinence message has been given. Fact: 2/3rds of teens who have been sexually active wish that they would have waited. Fact: Good abstinence education gives stategies for beginning and/or maintaining a committment to their future goals and to abstinence from ALL risky behaviors, not sex only. See the websites I listed in my first post, for those of you who are truly pro-choice for saving the lives and health of our kids. (I don't really expect PP supporters to do so.)
I will try not to offend by using the term "pro-abort" However, I think you should fill out the blank for what you are choosing to do when one of the choices includes taking the life of an innocent human being, to me it is like being "pro-choice" regarding the Nazi death camps, Hitler said he had good reasons to take someone elses life also, he considered the people he killed parasites and undesirable. For an abortion to be successful someone HAS TO DIE. I am posting not for the "pro-choice" group because they really don't care but for those who may be trying to figure out why the right to exist is the most fundamental of all rights, without it your life has no value, sex is a meaningless act of self-gratification, our young peoples bodies, minds and hearts have no value either.
June 23rd, 2008 at 12:18 pm
I think you were given an example earlier that contradicts this statement. See Professors comments about automobiles.
Source for your fact?
I couldn't agree with you more.
And the source for these "facts" is…?
Why? Do you think we can't read? I have a pretty open mind and, with convincing evidence, I have no problem changing my opinion on things.
Thank you. It is appreciated.
Really? And you know this how? I happen to care very much and would sincerely like to see the need for abortion eliminated — regardless of your judgment.
June 23rd, 2008 at 12:38 pm
Thank you Auora resident.That is a case where a decision needed to be made that some people would not be happy about but then again I think that there are alot of things that people do that other people don't like.Thats life.I don't want anyone to think that I want people to have abortions because I want them to kill babies,it's the opposite.There is so much child suffering in the world due to child abuse,neglect,abandonment,children growing up in foster care thinking no one wants them,child molesters,women who kill their children for no apparent reason,children who are schizophrenic due to the possible reason of abandonment or drug abuse during pregnancy,and many more things that children are the victims of.I don't think GOD is responsible for prenancies,he just gave us the ability to reproduce.What men and women do with that ability is another matter.I don't think GOD is all for child abuse in any form.Children are innocent and I personally think some are beter off not to be brought into this world to begin with if the mother doesn't want it.Those who are anti-choice are pro-abuse simply because they would rather a child be born to someone that doesn't want them and did nothing to prevent it and doesn't care once it's here.Most of them resent the fact that someone coerced them into giving birth.And then take it out on the child.Unless you are prepared to follow up with that child for the next 18 years then I suggest that you keep your opinion to yourself.If you really want to save chidren then save those that are already here and suffering from all of the abuses that are possible.
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:25 pm
I don't think that's a fair statement. Other than the abusers themselves, I don't believe anyone is pro-abuse any more than I believe people are pro-abort. Having said that, I would like to see people who do care spend more time actively helping those children that are here and in need. There are certainly plenty of them.
I couldn't agree with you more.
June 23rd, 2008 at 5:24 pm
You ar correct.Thank you for pointing that out.I think I may have gone off the deep end with that statement about pro-abuse.I just feel that no one has a right to try and force their views on someone by making them feel guilt when it's the child that suffers in the long run.And that is all the pictures do is make women feel guilty.It doesn't make them miraculously want to be pregnant and have a child any more than they did before they looked at it.
June 23rd, 2008 at 5:34 pm
I agree with you.
Again, I agree. I do think in the long run the photos do the protesters way more harm than good. They have offended more people than they realize and have driven people away from their goal.
June 23rd, 2008 at 5:39 pm
The day I started to visit this site was the day I drove down New York St and a man was holding a HUGE picture.All I could think about was how it made me think that they have gone too far now and I was so offended that they were going to force me to see that when I am no longer able too reproduce that I felt only a fraction of what a pregnant woman feels whether she plans too carry or terminate.I hope that makes sense.
June 23rd, 2008 at 5:47 pm
I only became active when I heard about the protesters. I had the experience of having to walk through them when I was younger and didn't want other women to have to face that alone. So, in a sense, I volunteer for PP BECAUSE of the protesters.
June 23rd, 2008 at 5:49 pm
How do I voluteer?
June 23rd, 2008 at 5:55 pm
Kathy,
Contact me at law_research_student@yahoo.com
June 23rd, 2008 at 7:05 pm
I will respond to a request for documentation of the facts I presented to Professor. His analogy of driving was a poor one, but maybe when I have time I will respond to it later.
If you really have an open mind go to:
http://www.4parents.gov on the left of the home page click on read "Talking to Your Pre-teen or Teen About Waiting", then click on the left "Why You Need to Talk", next "Sex and Risky Youth Behaviors" and "The Emotional Risk of Early Sexual Activity", the research sources are cited.
http://www.medinstitute.org on their home page click on Sexual Health there will be a list of researched topics, read "Frequently Asked Questions", "The Facts About Condoms" (especially read the last section of this page titled The Bottom Line), then click on STI Fact Sheets and read about any STI and how to prevent getting them.
http://www.teenpregnancy.org look under National Teen Pregnancy, Birth and Sexual Activity Data to see trends "Teens Sexual Activity in the U.S." reported by the CDC from 1991-2005 etc., there is an excellent article under Science Says "The Relationship Between Teen Motherhood".
BTW I did not say teens do not need any education about contraception. Risk reduction should not be promoted but risk elimination should as with any other health education. "No one rises to low expectations", especially teens. Look at the articles at 4parents.org listed above.
Got to go now. I will try to get back to the poor analogy between teens driving and having sex but don't know if I will have time.
June 23rd, 2008 at 7:09 pm
Thank you, Educator, for the links. I did, in fact, read them. The only thing I still take issue with is
While the first part is technicially true, the study you site says 53% have not had sex. This leaves 47% who have. That's almost 1/2.
Additionally, recent surveys show that 70 percent of U.S. teens have engaged in oral sex by the time they reach 18, and more than 45% have had intercourse at least once. More than 70% of young women and 80% of young men approve of premarital sex, according to a study published recently in the Review of General Psychology.
In addition, studies show sexually transmitted diseases are spreading at an alarming rate among young people. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that nearly half of the nation's new cases of STDs each year occur among adolescents and young adults. A recent study found that teens who took pledges of virginity as part of abstinence-only sex ed classes ultimately had STD rates similar to other young people and were less likely to use contraception or other forms of protection when they did become sexually active.
I'm glad that you do support contraception information — and I missed that in your prior post (my apologies). I do support teaching abstinance, but ONLY with cmprehensive sex education.
June 23rd, 2008 at 7:48 pm
Student says: "Wasn't it Jesus who said "Whoever curses father or mother must certainly be put to death."
Talk about a bad-faith interpretation of the Bible. Jesus was defending his disciples for minor discrepenancies with Mosaic law while accusing the Pharisees of being hypocrites. Matthew 15:4-9
I know you don't care about the Bible, Student, but don't say that Jesus was saying kids should be killed for disrespecting their parents. A fair reading says nothing like what you say it does.
June 23rd, 2008 at 8:14 pm
Brian,
I went back and re-read the entire chapter (including the loaves & fishes story) and still came to the same conclusion. Additionally, I did some internet research and found that many others (certainly more scholarly than I), interpreted that passage in the same manner.
I was inundated with christianity as a child and made the mistake of avoiding bible reading. Upon reaching adulthood, I took the time to actually read the thing and that is precisely what made me an athiest. I find it to be highly contradictory and downright evil.
June 23rd, 2008 at 8:26 pm
So you read Matth