PA and Secretary Community - Deskdemon.com

I was just wondering why this forum has been deserted since the election was decided.  Is that the only issue that anyone feels strongly about?  No issues or causes that you have a personal passion for?  



For the record, here's my controversial stance.  I am Pro-Choice on Everything - in other words, a Libertarian.  I firmly believe in the freedom and liberty outlined in the Constitution and believe in personal responsibility for our actions.  I believe in every adult's right to live their life as they so choose, as long as it does not interfere with someone else's right to do the same, or cause harm to the person or property of another.  I believe that if we continue to allow lawmakers to legislate away our liberties one at a time, we will fulfill the prediction that within 20 years, one-half of the American population will be jailed or have been jailed for one offense or another.  What a riduculous state of affairs that will be!



Anyone care to join me and get on your own soapbox?

Hey!  She took my soapbox!  ;-)



Libertarian and proud of it,

~shannon

Kind of lonely being a Libertarian isn't it?  Do some people tend to pat you on the head (figuratively) and tell you it must be nice to be so idealistic? It makes me crazy, but I just smile and say I consider myself in good company, because our founding fathers were exactly the same kind of idealists.  

I get funny looks from my entire family when we discuss politics.  My mother and sister, AND my in-laws are all republicans.  I'm a mix of ideas, but my firmest belief is the Bill of Rights being FIRMLY upheld.  When I say that personal rights cannot be infringed upon, and it's sad when it lets a criminal free, but it's a snowball effect.  I get the funny look then.  And then I tell them, "Go ahead, let the government take all of your rights away. They did that once.  I saw it in a movie. Well, actually it was a news reel.  Only, I didn't understand it, because everyone was speaking German."  Then they understand. If you take his rights away, because he's a criminal, someone else can take your rights away, because for one reason or another, you'll become a "criminal" too.



Free in NYC - Yank.

Yeah I hear that.  My SO shakes his head and smiles at me occasionally........he would be a Lib too except there are a few things he believes the govt should subsidize.  *sigh*  I'm workin' on him.  



~cg

I just had to chime in.  I'm not all that politically aware, but at least I wouldn't make a fool of myself on Leno's "Jaywalking" segment!  Can you believe those people are a product of American schools?!?!?



My dh helped me see the common sense in conservatism.  I grew up in a VERY liberal household.  Now we're Republican, but live in Maryland, so a lot of good that does!

 

I can understand the sense of conservatism, but there are some people who are TOO conservative and they look at others thinking, "You should be just like me." That's where I draw the line. What's right for most is usually not right for me.  I'm WAY open-minded and I can say that I can see the sense of things that others would not only not be into, but some people would find shocking or down-right horrific (tattoos, piercings, S-M, B&D, Vampirism).  I'm not the kind of person that calls homosexuality a lifestyle, like it's a choice.  I believe in a woman's right to choose. I believe in an alternate religion than the general Judeo-Christianity and I think that those who think I'm a bad person for having more that one point of view in sight and to contemplate are the ones who aren't good for the evolution of our society.  I've long since come to grips with the fact that the Puritan roots and origins of this country run deep, but when it comes to freedom of choice (which actually isn't granted in the Constitution, it's an extension of the 1st Amendment and the freedom of speech), it's my choice, after all, isn't it?



Wow, did I say that?  Shocking what comes out when you start talking about your beliefs, huh?



Choosing and not Losing in NYC - Yank

What's also funny is that I considered myself quite liberal for many years.  What it comes down to, for me, is this:  anyone should be able to be anything s/he wants to be, do anything s/he wants to do, as long as it doesn't hurt others.  I'm extremely open-minded; my biggest beef is that the government shouldn't be expected to do anything but defend borders, prosecute the really criminal things (don't get me started on this, but drug possession shouldn't be criminal!  Owning *anything* shouldn't be criminal as long as you don't harm anyone else with it) and protect our freedom.  It's not Uncle Sam's job to provide me with retirement income, decide what I should do with my body, etc etc etc. . . well you get the idea.  And darn it, US darn sure shouldn't be taking the third-plus of my income!  Yankee you're right, it's kinda funny when we start on this vein. . . .

my four cents for now

~shannon

I have familiarized myself with a variety of political views, and I have one rather lengthy point to bring up.  While I lean toward the Republican camp, the Libertarian philosophy has many merits.  Its view on legalizing drugs intrigues me, and I couldn't agree more with the view on gun control.  I have difficulty with the Democratic point of view, because this country was founded as and is a Republic, not a democracy, even though the media would have us believe otherwise - - that's a whole 'nother talk show, though.  I see that party as socialism in disguise, especially the way the last administration carried out their interpretation of the philosophy during what I refer to as the 8-year reign of terror.  When our founding fathers began, there was not the technology or medical know-how to support some of the things we now like to take for granted because they are convenient and speedy.  It grieves me to the bone to hear anybody say that we should be able to do anything we want as long as it doesn't hurt anybody and include abortion in that laundry list.  Abortion is a MAJOR decision, and it is something that is too readily available to the emotional/mental/spiritual detriment of many women.  I believe that life begins at conception - - the spirit of a person is there at conception and while the body develops to a point and then declines, the spirit grows and develops into adulthood and old age (and beyond).  I realize there are situations where abortion should be considered.  I also believe that personal responsibility - - on everybody's part - - begins before the baby is created.  This is such a hard topic, I can't believe I started it, because I really can't finish it.  There are too many facets.  I have to say what I have to say, though.  Anyway, to bring up the point I wanted to make when I started this is that abortion *does* hurt other people.  Just because another person is in my body and doesn't yet have an audible voice, I don't think I should necessarily have the automatic right to say that he or she has no right to exist because of choices I made.  Am I saying women should have to pay the price for something they are not "totally" responsible for?  Well, should an unborn child pay the price for something he or she had absolutely NO responsibility for?  Regardless of whether a baby is merely a two-cell "dot" or a *visibly* moving/squirming older fetus trying desperately to escape the brain-sucking instruments of "partial" abortion (whatever the hell that is!), it has an identity, and it deserves more than to be casually dismissed/sentenced to death.  I believe that there is a highly organized abortion industry and that the best interests of women having abortion are not always considered in view of the fact that fetal by-products have monetary value.  Many women are sold on abortions, and not because it will be in their best interests.  It is true, I'm sure, that some women get good information before making a decision for abortion.  But, I am just as certain it is true that many women are not given the opportunity/time to consider the long-term effects an abortion will have on them emotionally/mentally.  Anyway, unless you have seen a picture of a garbage can filled will unborn babies, my point of view might be hard to swallow.  I guess it's a matter of conscience, if morality is too strong of a word.

As you say, it's a matter of conscience, and you cannot dictate morality or legislate conscience to particular ways of thinking, no matter how much special interest groups would like to have that happen.



Shall we go back to the days of third-floor walk-ups with folding operating tables and dirty surgical instruments?  Or do we give enough credit to the intelligence of each individual to seek out information and make up her mind regarding what is right and moral?  Again, no special interest groups should have enough power to intimidate and use scare tactics to force their opinions upon others.  There are those who would have women incarcerated or penalized in various ways because they smoke cigarettes or drink alcohol during pregnancy.  While neither of these habits are good practice during pregnancy, they are not illegal by today's laws.  There are many who would change that if they had the power.



I neither condone nor condemn abortion.  My viewpoints are my own and I do not allow any political party or special interest group or faction to dictate my thoughts or actions.  I truly believe that most of the informed, thinking population of the United States considers their civil liberties and freedoms every time special interest groups move toward limiting those liberties and freedoms, whether that involves abortion, gun control, Internet usage, regulation of alcohol and tobacco, and on and on and on.  



I make each decision in my life based on the situation, how it affects the people in my life, how it affects my environment, and according to my personal conscience, not someone else's.  However, I do not ever want to make the assumption that my viewpoint is right to the exclusion of the viewpoints of others.  I hope I will always feel that way.



Oh, and by the way, if you want to investigate a real "Reign of Terror", wander back to the late 60's and early 70's and visit the Nixon administration.  I was an adult and young mother at the time, and I still have trouble believing that nightmare occurred.  All those memoirs that were started in Federal prisons.  And the ending of the time where the media ignored the indiscretions of our elected and appointed officials.  Our country was changed forever, all because of one security guard who found a door taped open in an office building in the Watergate complex.  Amazing, isn't it, how circumstances turn on the smallest event?

 



Robbie

This is the kind of discussion I long for.  We don't see eyeball-to-eyeball on every minute point, but I think we have the same heart on two issues here.  I thought about what I had written when I woke up and, given that I have a degree that focuses on the way people use information, the only thing I would ask you to consider is that while it is true that many people can seek out their own information, there are many people who do not know where to begin to look for that information, they do not know that it is even available, or they may be afraid to ask for it.  They could be missing information that would totally change their mind about abortion.  I am all for that 24 or 48 hour "cool down" period bill that I think got fired down, and it is not for the sake of controlling anyone.  It is for their own good, so they can learn about all of the information that is available and have a chance to digest it before they make a decision that could muck up their emotional/mental health down the road when they're older/wiser.  That, of course, opens the can of worms, who would gather all of this information, who would determine which information was appropriate, and how much would all of this information cost?  I don't think that the way things are now are just for all concerned, including the unborn.  And, I don't believe they ever can be just, on this earth, for all concerned.  But, I do think they could be made a whole lot better.  Six-seven million unborn babies killed (that we know about) since Roe v. Wade should make more people stop and think.  Instead, it seems to be something we have become quite callous to, as a nation.  Anyway, off that topic for now.



I have to agree that the Nixon Administration had its fair share of, um, er, *indiscretions*, as did the Clinton.  You bring up a good point that I have difficulty coming to terms with sometimes, and that is that I was extremely young during the Nixon era.  I was blissfully ignorant of anything amiss in the White House.  Now, though, I am older and, I hope, wiser.  Come to think of it, though, at least Nixon had the grace to leave the public eye after he left office. If I were Hillary Clinton, I would want to have my husband kidnapped and taken away somewhere quiet in Switzerland for awhile, so I felt like my career had a chance to get off the ground . . . (Will you bite?!  ;-)  )

Now if only I had something to add..........I'm just enjoying the discussion.



Ha, if I were Hillary, and things really were the way they are presented by the media, I'd'a divorced his sorry ass.  But then again, all is never as it seems...........



shannon

No, Robbie does not bite.  But, consider this.  With the exception of Harry Truman and possibly Jimmy Carter, no president since before FDR has not been guilty of some so-called "moral" indiscretions (and I'm not referring to just sexual ones), many while in office. (Okay, so Truman dropped the bomb, but that's another whole issue.)  Nixon didn't sleep around, but he sure drove Pat Nixon to drink.  It's the illegal arrest of thousands of demonstrators during the Nixon administration (put up in the 'tent prisons' and then released when the Justice Department people warned Nixon's henchmen that the arrests were without legal basis) and the "Pentagon Papers" and the "enemies list" and the secret bombings of Cambodia and the National Guard fiasco at Kent State.  Everyone wants to get all up in arms about the Waco incident (and, by the way, have you ever talked to any of the locals who knew any of David Koresh's bunch? I have), but everyone seems to forget the Kent State killings.  Those Kent State students did not have a stockpile of weapons, and there were teenagers in the crowd.  That old saying that "What is past is prologue" is a word to the wise and the not so wise.  I believe it was Harry Truman (forgive me if I paraphrase) who said something like, "The only thing new under the sun is the history you haven't yet read."



And Nixon did not go too quickly or too quietly.  He produced Memoirs, which is a really slick piece of fiction purported to be fact.  I'm not defending Clinton, I'm just suggesting that we view all our government leaders with equal perspective.



My point (and I DO have one) is that I will not be swayed.  I choose to read and watch and listen and assimilate information, weighing it carefully, and making my own judgments and coming to my own conclusions.  I do not need special interest groups trying to tell me what to think or advising me on what is "moral" or "immoral".   I have a functioning, perfectly good brain of my own, and I will develop my own opinions (of which I have many).  



I do hope we are not boring our international readers with all this talk.  We Americans do love a good debate.    

Thank you for your reply.  I guess when you lay all those cards on the table, "There is not one righteous, no, not one!"  Apparently, you may be a Democrat, and I have really pushed a button.  Sorry, didn't mean to do that, just for the sake of doing it.  I have just been so offended for the last 8 years, I can't keep my mouth shut any longer.  And, actually, now that I've said it, I guess "disillusioned" is a better term than "offended."  I would have been just as torqued out of shape whether it had been a Republican, a Libertarian, or (don't get ME started on *this* one!) our (in)famous governor here in Minnesota!  I don't agree 100% with the Democratic philosophy, but I very much admired our late Senator Hubert H. Humphrey and I think I would have supported him had I been older than 9 at the time he ran against Nixon.  



Regarding the other issue, you are more well-informed and more aware of how to be well-informed than many people, I am sure.  I'm not sure we communicated on this issue the way I intended and, because I'm running out of time, I need to drop it for today, but I wanted to get back to you.  I'm not dead in the water, but I am out of steam right now!



So, we have come to the conclusion that you will not be swayed on certain things and neither will I, but still we have things in common!  Not sure what we accomplished here today, but it beats the socks off of recommending a new strategy for buying toner!

Ee-gads I just HATE it when I (or anybody else) gets out of control with those doggone exclamation points!!!  I believe the points I wanted to make could come across with out trying to emphasize them anymore than by just saying them!!!  Don't you?!!!!   Woo hoo!!!  Have a good night!  GE!

. . . it's not that I "gets" out of control all that often, you see!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



(Who invented the exclamation point, anyway?!)

One thing you might consider if we have future discussions is that I do not label others and do not like to be labeled.  I have no party affiliation because they are ridiculous.  No one party can encompass the true feelings of a thinking individual.  



Yes, right, I'm a democrat. (Just so there's no misunderstanding, that was sarcasm.)  That's why I don't believe in gun control and I do believe in capital punishment.  Just because I did not attack Clinton and did point out the many flaws of the Nixon administration does not mean I am swayed by the left or the right.  Again, I make up my own mind.  I just used Nixon's era because it's so easy to come up with so many things that were wrong.  I could just as easily have used LBJ or JFK or DDE.  Generalization and pigeon-holing is dangerous and unproductive in any debate.



And you hardly pushed a button.  I don't know why you consider my remarks as being a reaction to button pushing.  I spoke my mind, that's all.  Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and I will be the first to jump up and defend that - - you better believe it!   I don't agree with your rationalizations, but that does not mean I am overreacting.  That is what is dangerous about this type of discussion by e-mail or Internet postings - - so much is lost from not having voice inflection to gauge a person's tone.   (Note to Andrea - maybe your first impulse was right in that discussion we had a while back - - maybe TAA is not the place for this type of forum?)



Please . . . no labels.  I don't like labels on anything except my Tupperware.  That's where they belong.

Whatever, MsRobbie.  My apologies.  Evidently, I lost you and, I know you have now lost me, even though now, apparently, you appear to think you have correctly pegged me as a "labeler."  (But, wait, isn't that a label?  LOL)  Just because I said that apparently you're a democrat doesn't mean that I was able to sum you up in that one word.  Wow, wouldn't it be amazing to have that ability?  I'd be making a HECKUVA lot more money than I do now!  I just need to use different, more specific, words to eventually get to the same general place of common ground, and it takes me longer to get there than it does you.  Who knows?  I most certainly didn't mean for the discussion I originally started to be finished in one or two postings.  I had hoped that it would develop and that others could throw in their take on things.  I know it is possible there are things I haven't taken into consideration in molding my personal worldview and, by discussing controversial things with others, I hope to grow as a person.  Remember, you didn't have to respond to my posting, but you chose to.  I'm glad that you did; however, I assumed (an error on my part) that we might actually get somewhere other than to this place.  I'm saddened by the turn this has taken.  



Ah, if only we could all say what we meant in a way that other people would understand our heart at the same time, regardless of the medium in which we choose to express ourselves.  I wish I could add vocal inflections and facial expressions, but we both know that is impossible.  It appears that neither one of us is strictly anything, politically speaking, and we both have "way strong" feelings on certain topics, just like anyone would.  And, obviously, right now, we do not agree.  I find it impossible to go through life talking in generalizations that will never offend anyone.  Too ho-hum for me.  (I think that is the one thing I have in common with MustangSally, wherever she's gone now that "that other place" is inoperative.)



And, you're probably right that TAA is not the place for discussions like this.  On the other hand, though, it does liven things up a bit, so I wish that it were.  It's kind of a Catch 22, if you ask me, regarding having a place on this website where people can get more into things.  Have a good rest of the week. And, if in order to have a good week, you need to lock me out of here, I understand.  Next time I want to get deep, I'll go look up a website on Nietzche or Goethe.

GE, you can say whatever you want . . . after all (and I THINK I'm right on this one   ) it is your right to have your own opinion.  I don't believe anyone is going to lock you out of this website for what you have written here.  I don't have that authority anymore, and I would not even if I did (perhaps you missed the post where Andrea advised everyone that I resigned as a member of the Editorial Board).  And everything you and I have entered falls within the boundaries set by the website, so I think we're both safe.



Anyway, you go right ahead and voice your opinions.  Just keep in mind that when you do, all others have the right - - - and the obligation - - - to respond with their views as well.  How boring it would be if we all agreed on everything.



By the way, you might want to try Harry S. Truman as an alternative  to Friedrich Nietzsche.  I think you'd get a kick out of him.

Why ever would I DO That GE? your points were politely stated, your views laid out fairly clearly and there was no name calling.  You met the parameters for posting in this forum, you did not demean or belittle and this forum and THIS FORUM ONLY are for discussions of the very nature that have occurred. However uncomfortable they may be for some people.



While I will not state my views on the subject at hand, I Will support YOUR right, and Robbie's right to do so in the manner that you have both used.

There was one thing I found interesting about the mention of abortion.  Whereas I've never had one, never have been pregnant and probably never will be, this issue still affects me as a woman. I support a woman's right to choose and I firmly wish abortion was MORE available. With the Federal govt. removing aid to health clinics (that actually are geared more toward women's health that ONE procedure), I think that there are more unnecessary births than we think. Has anyone ever seen a photograph (or up close) a 9-month-old baby with gonorrhea? Or seen the corpses of abused infant and toddlers? The folks that do this to their children shouldn't have been parents in the first place. And had they had that other choice, without all the stigma attached to it, there would be a little, not much, but a little less suffering of the kids that are here. I do not want to say that there is no life before birth, but this isn't my belief.  When studying for my BA in Forensic Psych, I studied the minds of serial murderers and child molesters. And it was required to view case photos. If I could gouge my eyes out, I would, to forget the horror I've seen. And I extend this to incestuous parents, who are just child molesters growing their own victims in disguise and getting the "out" of an easy sentence. The less children that are born into this situation, the better.



I have a good friend who just gave birth to a little girl yesterday. And she didn't keep it. OK, abortion wasn't for her, her choice, I respect that. I didn't preach, I supported her fully. But she gave it up for adoption to a lovely couple who are very happy.  Again, I was in full support. But when I tell friends this, they frown.  She has a violent, abusive boyfriend who "didn't want it anyway". Better for the baby to go to someone who wants to be good to her. But if the fetus doesn't grow into a full born baby, doesn't that soul go to another waiting baby? (Sorry, I'm a reincarnationist.) If I'm sounding too strong, I apologize, but I think that organized religion and organized government need to step out of a person's right to choose what is right for their own body. After all, until it is born, it is still part of your body.  

Thought I needed to run for cover last night, but thank you for your comments, Robbie, Andrea, and Yankee.  That's what I meant that this is such a many-faceted topic.  There still are those women who shouldn't have one, I feel, because they get railroaded into having one by others.  Yet, when I hear of experiences such as Yankeestarbuck's, that's when my heart/thoughts/feelings get stretched into a flat sheet, and I can't say that there is one right answer.  I certainly am not God, and I hope that job NEVER becomes available!  



I laughed (to myself) at my friends and co-workers who were convinced that when Bush became president his first priority would be to overturn Roe v. Wade.  It amused me, because I don't think it is possible, and I don't think it is in the best interest of people in this country when there are so many "lookin' for love in all the wrong places," among other things that result in pregnancies.  I just wish that there wasn't an abortion industry out there that receives money for fetal by-products, because I know, and most thinking folks would have to agree, that where money is involved, there is less of a tendency to do what is in the best interest of the person who needs help/more information/more time/whatever.  I saw a pro-life brochure with a little girl on the cover, missing her right arm.  She was the victim of one of those partial birth abortions.  Seems the abortionist missed sucking her brains out, and got her arm, instead.  By the time they realized it, it was too late:  out of birth canal, and *then* she was considered human, I guess, and they couldn't kill her, because it would be murder.  (Well, what would it have been while she was still in the birth canal?!  That doesn't compute to ole linear-thinking me.)  Can you imagine the gut-wrenching turmoil that the mother (given that she has *any* kind of a conscience at all) would go through?  Did anybody tell her the risks involved, or did they just hope to be able to sell another fetus to wherever fetuses get sold.  (I've seen skin care products with human placenta in them, but I don't think I even want to know what they put unborn or "half-born?" babies into.)



I'm not a reincarnationist, Yankee, but your thought is lovely.  It gives one hope where one might otherwise hvae none.  (I'll spare you my spiritual view until someone else brings up that topic.)  I happen to believe that babies and children go to heaven and that those who were torn away from loving mothers for whatever reason will be in heaven to be raised by those mothers when it is their time to join them.  As for the others, I don't know who raises them, but I believe they go to heaven and are very well cared for.  And, I believe we won't know the answers to the great majority of our questions until we get to the other side of this "veil" where we can't see what's going to happen, but we just know that there is something more that's being kept from us in this life.



I truly hope that we can keep this type of discussion going, because, face it, this certainly isn't the kind of topic you can casually bring up at work or on the street, and there are very few people who are courageous enough to blurt out all their feelings and opinion without some degree of anonymity.  



I don't know about anybody else, but after having been in the administrative field for so long, closing in rapidly on 2 decades, after while it is just not all that exciting to talk about only administrative topics.  Office politics amuse me and, rarely, intrigue me, because there is the same set of personalities wherever you work.  They just appear in different roles in the companies where I've worked.  Right now I am fortunate enough to have found a cast of fellow characters that are set up to my liking.  Not that that couldn't change.  Fortunately, the other characters have it as good as I do or better, so they are happy to stay put for now, too.



I happen to be very pleased that there is a place on this website to go to let it all hang out, so to speak.  Right before I logged on here, I clicked on OC, and it is literally gurgling/gasping for breath, before it breaks in half and both halves plunge to the bottom of the WWW-ocean.  I will miss it, since it was my first experience with message boards, but perhaps all of the miscommunications that were on it will also be lost forever!  So, finally, in answer to your question that I took as a dare, DJCPS, yes, there are plenty of us with strong opinions out here!  And, Robbie, when I have time I will look up Former Prez Truman.  Can you recommend a book on him?  GE

You asked for it, you got it, GE.



Check out Plain Speaking:  An Oral Biography of Harry S. Truman by Merle Miller.  I've read it a number of times over the years, and there are wonderful insights on politics in the United States in the 30's, 40's and 50's.  Read on and find out why the U.S. really got involved in Vietnam, how Eisenhower was almost brought home from Europe in shame at the end of WWII, and why Herbert Hoover got a bad rap as president.  A fascinating read.

Way to go, ladies!  These types of discussions (or debates if you will) are what I thought this forum was meant to be, and why I posted the No Strong Opinions! thread.



Some very good points have been made - and so politely too!  It seems the only thing most of us can agree on is that we want to make informed decisions for ourselves, not be told what we are supposed to think or feel about an issue!



To me, it's always interesting to hear the reasons behind why someone takes a particular position on an issue - and everyone has their own set of reasons.  As long as you can express those reasons without resorting to demeaning or denying other's rights to their own opinion, I find the differences stimulating.

 

I know I'm late to the conversation but I feel it necessary to voice my opinion on the discussed topic.  My view on this controversial topic is that unless you've been with someone who went through the process, or been that person, it's hard to see where we're coming from.  Yes, I've been there.  I, who love kids and have high morale values, etc, have had an abortion.  And the amount of "pro-life" stuff I had to see, among educational tools, was staggering.  This was only 8 years ago, but I saw every video they could find, had to see a video on what it looks like, what it is, and then after seeing all of that had to decide if that was what I wanted to do.  (My reasons are mine and personal and won't be posted here).  From the day I thought of getting an abortion to the day I did it was over a week.  Some say this period of waiting isn't the same everywhere but most that I've talked to (in the Mid-west) have all agreed that there is already a time-delay built into the process.  So passing a law requiring it is redundant.  But this was a decision that I was glad that I was able to make, on my own but with the support of loved ones.  It is also a decision that I live with every day of my life, every time I see someone with a baby; when I realize that my child would have been 8 this year.  Did I make the right or best decision?  I believe so but who can tell where the other path might have led me if I followed it.  All I do know is that I'm glad I was able to make the decision for myself and that the government didn't get to decide for me.



And that's my opinion, which is only one of many out there...one voice in millions on various sides of this argument.  Thank you for your time.

Disallusioned, you are a very brave person to pass on your experiences.  (And that's NOT a label, it's a compliment!)



What is good for the goose is not always good for the gander, and no two situations are alike.



Thanks for sharing.



Robbie



 

Actually, I do believe those people are a product of our school system - sad but true.



I played Trivial Pursuit with a recent high school grad (Class of 2000). Now, I didn't expect her to know all the answers because some of them are tough for me (a college grad). However, I didn't expect to have to read my own trivia questions to myself because she couldn't read. When I say she couldn't read the questions, I don't mean hard words, hard-to-pronounce words or French terms. I mean basic 3rd grade level (maybe 5th grade level) words and sentences!



I was shocked! Especially since she had just graduated from the school district my children (when I decide to have children) would attend.

This is another area where I definitely have a strong opinion!  With the federal government holding the purse strings, our school system has turned into a boot camp for turning out little politically correct soldiers, at the expense of creativity, independent thought, and personal responsibility.  Any sign of independent thought is mercilessly eradicated, and the death of common sense is teaching our children that justice doesn't exist, only adherence to the rules no matter how ridiculous!