One day there will be an in-utero diagnostic test that will give a probability that a fetus will have a certain sexual orientation.
You seem awful certain of that. Most experts in the field aren't even sure how much of it is nature, and how much is nurture. DNA is not destiny, after all.
When that day comes, same-sex rights advocates will go from being passively pro-choice ("we're all progressives!") to aggressively pro-life ("it's legal to kill based on sexual orientation?!")
No, they won't. If and when that day comes, they'll handle it as feminists address sex-selective abortion today: not by restricting abortions performed for that purpose, but by addressing the stigma/culture that causes people to want to abort fetuses of a certain type in the first place.
It's more work, to be sure, but the end result is a whole lot better than using one injustice as an excuse to commit another.
While your religious beliefs certainly color your sexual morals, the answer is inside you, if you listen. The more important question is "Is your relationship with your boyfriend ready for sex?" That is a question only you can answer. There are websites you can visit that may help you evaluate your relationship, google Healthy Relationship or Healthy Marriage for several sites. It sounds more like you as a person are not ready yet for a sexual relationship. Sex is not the end all of a relationship, with the right person it's great, but not if your not ready.
If you wait, there may come a time when you are sure, one way or the other. 5 years seems like a long time, and it is, a quarter of your life, but I don't think I've ever heard anyonelooking back at their life say 'I should have had sex with...'. I hope this helps.
One day there will be an in-utero diagnostic test that will give a probability that a fetus will have a certain sexual orientation.
When that day comes, same-sex rights advocates will go from being passively pro-choice ("we're all progressives!") to aggressively pro-life ("it's legal to kill based on sexual orientation?!")
Dawkins' "Greatest Show on Earth" is an incredible book! Just finished it myself ... and it has SO many implications for this discussion. For example, DNA persists and doesn't "care" about alive or dead any more than a cookbook does.
I found it to be a profoundly hopeful and optimistic take on the grand sweep of life ...there is certainly plenty of room for each of us to make our own moral, religious, and philisophical choices.
I agree the Stupak amendment has gotten all the attention, while other troubling provisions are largely ignored.
I think there are two separate issues here though. I'm not a health professional, but I do think spacing the time between pregnancies IS a health issue - for mom and her family. (Whatever size she ultimately wants that to be.)
TOTALLY agree nurses have no business talking about "involvement in the criminal justice system."
But I think we do want to support the visiting nurse program ... for healthy moms and babies.
Gee, Truth, I'm so glad you're here to mansplain to me how something I know more about than you ever will, since I am educated in the subject quite throughly and can actually experience it. Did nobody ever tell you about how it's rude to assume?
I do not think the thing that defines "woman" is the measure of how much she sacrafices for others. I also do not believe that women are moral children with no real agency or free will until its convienient for you and your ilk to insist that our supposedly non-existent free will is best spent servicing others, which is supposedly abhorrent because posing naked is servicing the male, but insisting that women exist to serve others at the expense of themselves is totally different. You're a raging hypocrite.
NFP is still not "natural", it does not occur in nature. It is something humans created to avoid procreating while still keeping the recreational part. Just like all other forms of birth control. Whine all you want, but it's not different just because there is a higher chance you might concieve. There is a higher chance of conception with the sponge than there is with the condom, but percentages don't make the two morally different, though they have almost the same function - preventing sperm from reaching the cervix. I don't agree with the sect of evangelicals that practise quiverfull, but at least they are morally consistent about it and not hypocrites who insist all contraceptive sex is akin to murder or at least irresponsible, and then go and plan their families using a method designed to give them recreational sex without reoccuring pregnancy.
Too attached to Edward Cullen for your feminist sensibilities? Just in time for Thanksgiving, here's an unorthodox guide to kicking the Twilight habit.
The best way to be an ally and a support to anyone often starts with questions like "How can I support you?" or "What do you want and need from me in this?" Then you listen to the answers and respond accordingly.
As Thanksgiving Day quickly approaches, we want to take a moment to reflect on how grateful we are for the people who help make RH Reality Check what it is today.
The Stupak furor has obscured the shocking fertility and family control provisions in current health care legislation. The House bill actually authorizes a plan to monitor the childbearing decisions and family lives of low-income women.
Revisions in Peru's Penal Code may lead to decriminalizing abortion in cases of rape or severe disability of the fetus. But conservative political and religious forces are, predictably, opposing these changes.
Rights advocates can forget that there is an entire world of potential allies out there we may be missing because we are not effectively communicating with them.
Muslim women in India are caught between the strictures of family and personal law and persistent discrimination against them as women from both the Indian government and society writ large.
Opponents and supporters of women's choices in childbearing agreed early on, in theory, to maintain the “status quo” with "abortion neutral" health care legislation. The Senate bill achieves this goal; the House bill does not.
An epidemic of sexually transmitted infections in the U.S. disproportionately affects blacks, youth, gays and the poor. Talking openly about sex is the first step in prevention.
Bethany Cajúne, pregnant and in a substance abuse recovery program, was jailed for 19 days for traffic violations. But officials repeatedly denied her a drug necessary to her recovery, putting her health and the life of her fetus at risk.
No one reading this has forgotten that the House passed a healthcare “reform” bill that includes the Stupak Amendment. Here's a speech Congressman Stupak needs to hear.
In a strange twist, Nevada anti-choice groups, complaining that the wording of a "personhood" amendment to establish civil rights for fertilized eggs is too vague, are on the same side as Planned Parenthood and ACLU.
I'm a transgendered sex worker, and I want to not get killed for who I am or what I do. As our death count rises, I beg that you consider your prejudices around gender, and let us live in peace. I'm literally begging for my life.
In examining rooms, we see women in terrible pain, but their suffering doesn’t count in Stupak/Pitts world. By banishing abortion from the reform bill, the amendment punishes women who need to end unwanted or unhealthy pregnancies.
With the Stupak amendment literally and symbolically stripping women of equal status, the movie "Precious" presents, in grim detail, the way race, class and bias render a woman's body simultaneously invisible and subject to abuse.
The CDC releases its annual "Abortion Surveillance" report on abortion in the United States, for 2006. The report says the surveillance provides critical information needed to evaluate programs aimed at preventing unintended pregnancy.
"Crisis pregnancy" centers in Baltimore must now display signs stating they do not provide abortions or birth-control referrals under a measure approved by the City Council Monday night and thought to be the first of its kind in the nation."
In the Weekly Pulse, Lindsay Beyerstein reports on this week's developments on health care reform, the public option, and new recommendations on mammogram screening for breast cancer detection.
You seem awful certain of that. Most experts in the field aren't even sure how much of it is nature, and how much is nurture. DNA is not destiny, after all.
No, they won't. If and when that day comes, they'll handle it as feminists address sex-selective abortion today: not by restricting abortions performed for that purpose, but by addressing the stigma/culture that causes people to want to abort fetuses of a certain type in the first place.
It's more work, to be sure, but the end result is a whole lot better than using one injustice as an excuse to commit another.
Now if they would just require similar signs in the offices of OB/GYNS who won't prescribe and pharmacies that won't provide hormonal birth control --
While your religious beliefs certainly color your sexual morals, the answer is inside you, if you listen. The more important question is "Is your relationship with your boyfriend ready for sex?" That is a question only you can answer. There are websites you can visit that may help you evaluate your relationship, google Healthy Relationship or Healthy Marriage for several sites. It sounds more like you as a person are not ready yet for a sexual relationship. Sex is not the end all of a relationship, with the right person it's great, but not if your not ready.
If you wait, there may come a time when you are sure, one way or the other. 5 years seems like a long time, and it is, a quarter of your life, but I don't think I've ever heard anyonelooking back at their life say 'I should have had sex with...'. I hope this helps.
There really should be a _federal_ level law preventing these "clinics" dfrom misrepresenting themselves.
Catseye ( (|) )
The woman _went in voluntarily_ to finish up a sentence for _traffic violations_!!!!! These people are nothing short of evil.
Catseye ( (|) )
One day there will be an in-utero diagnostic test that will give a probability that a fetus will have a certain sexual orientation.
When that day comes, same-sex rights advocates will go from being passively pro-choice ("we're all progressives!") to aggressively pro-life ("it's legal to kill based on sexual orientation?!")
Dawkins' "Greatest Show on Earth" is an incredible book! Just finished it myself ... and it has SO many implications for this discussion. For example, DNA persists and doesn't "care" about alive or dead any more than a cookbook does.
I found it to be a profoundly hopeful and optimistic take on the grand sweep of life ...there is certainly plenty of room for each of us to make our own moral, religious, and philisophical choices.
What a great way of framing this whole idea!
I agree the Stupak amendment has gotten all the attention, while other troubling provisions are largely ignored.
I think there are two separate issues here though. I'm not a health professional, but I do think spacing the time between pregnancies IS a health issue - for mom and her family. (Whatever size she ultimately wants that to be.)
TOTALLY agree nurses have no business talking about "involvement in the criminal justice system."
But I think we do want to support the visiting nurse program ... for healthy moms and babies.
Gee, Truth, I'm so glad you're here to mansplain to me how something I know more about than you ever will, since I am educated in the subject quite throughly and can actually experience it. Did nobody ever tell you about how it's rude to assume?
I do not think the thing that defines "woman" is the measure of how much she sacrafices for others. I also do not believe that women are moral children with no real agency or free will until its convienient for you and your ilk to insist that our supposedly non-existent free will is best spent servicing others, which is supposedly abhorrent because posing naked is servicing the male, but insisting that women exist to serve others at the expense of themselves is totally different. You're a raging hypocrite.
NFP is still not "natural", it does not occur in nature. It is something humans created to avoid procreating while still keeping the recreational part. Just like all other forms of birth control. Whine all you want, but it's not different just because there is a higher chance you might concieve. There is a higher chance of conception with the sponge than there is with the condom, but percentages don't make the two morally different, though they have almost the same function - preventing sperm from reaching the cervix. I don't agree with the sect of evangelicals that practise quiverfull, but at least they are morally consistent about it and not hypocrites who insist all contraceptive sex is akin to murder or at least irresponsible, and then go and plan their families using a method designed to give them recreational sex without reoccuring pregnancy.