Palin: Daughter, 17, is pregnant

[DaneMcCloud]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-09-01-palin-daughter_N.htm

More of a confirmation, not a re-post.

By William M. Welch, USA TODAY
ST. PAUL — Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, John McCain's choice for his vice presidential running mate, disclosed Monday that her unmarried, 17-year-old daughter is pregnant.

Palin and her husband, Todd, issued a statement on the pregnancy as Republicans launched their presidential nominating convention. The opening day was shortened out of concern for Hurricane Gustav.

The Palins said their eldest daughter, Bristol, will keep her baby and marry the father. The Palins identified the baby's father only as Levi and provided no other details.

Steve Schmidt, McCain's chief strategist, told reporters here that the campaign released the statement about Palin's daughter in answer to questions from reporters and in response to "disturbing smears around on the Internet." McCain adviser Mark Salter told the Associated Press that the statement about the baby was to rebut rumors on the Internet that Palin's youngest son, Trig, was actually her daughter's.

"Our beautiful daughter Bristol came to us with news that as parents we knew would make her grow up faster than we had ever planned," the Palins, parents of five children, said. "We're proud of Bristol's decision to have her baby and even prouder to become grandparents. As Bristol faces the responsibilities of adulthood, she knows she has our unconditional love and support."

Palin, who opposes abortion rights, gave birth to Trig in April even though she knew he had Down syndrome.

Schmidt also disclosed, in response to questions from journalists, that Palin's husband Todd "had a DWI" or driving while intoxicated charge on his record 24 years ago.

The Palins, in their statement, asked that the family's privacy on Bristol's pregnancy be respected "as has always been the tradition of children of candidates."

Schmidt said McCain knew of Bristol Palin's pregnancy before offering the Alaska governor the vice presidential spot. He said they discussed the issue in a "private conversation" but declined to say if Palin volunteered the information.

Schmidt said that it is "offensive" to ask if Bristol's pregnancy has any bearing on the campaign and that it is a "private family matter." He also said it is "demeaning" to suggest this news might have any "bearing" on Palin's capacity to be vice president.

Speaking with reporters in Monroe, Mich., today, Barack Obama said candidates' families should be "off limits."

[BCD]

Big mistake making them get married.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Abstinence only, FTW.

[kstater]

The real question: Will there be shotguns at the wedding?

[keg in kc]

Should be a non-issue.

[BucEyedPea]

Abstinence only, FTW.

Apparently that wasn't practiced if you go by the results.

[HolmeZz]

Big mistake making them get married.

You don't believe in compounding your mistakes?

[BucEyedPea]

The real question: Will there be shotguns at the wedding?

Well, they certainly have them.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Should be a non-issue.

It is a non-issue. The only thing it does is further underscore how worthless AO education is. I must say it is ironic how well it worked out for them.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

You don't believe in compounding your mistakes?

I want to know if people view this as defiling the sanctity of marriage. Quickie weddings in case of a bun in the oven are fine, gays---burn.

[jAZ]

Apparently that wasn't practiced if you go by the results.

Sorta the downfall of that particular philosphoy of child rearing.

[keg in kc]

Sorta the downfall of that particular philosphoy of child rearing.If she'd have been...reared it wouldn't have happened.

*rim shot*

[BucEyedPea]

Sorta the downfall of that particular philosphoy of child rearing.

Unless you see a child as a cross-to-bear, a gift or one that can be put up for adoption.

[Mr. Kotter]

Big mistake making them get married.

Link? :shrug:

[Logical]

Really don't care, the fact that she was unable to raise her family to use protection, has no bearing on her ability to run a country.

[BucEyedPea]

It is a non-issue. The only thing it does is further underscore how worthless AO education is. I must say it is ironic how well it worked out for them.

Did she have that? Or did she go to public school and get what everyone else gets for Sex Ed? Just curious.

[banyon]

Unless you see a child as a cross-to-bear, a gift or one that can be put up for adoption.

So, teen pregnancy is not really a problem then?

[Mr. Kotter]

Did she have that? Or did she go to public school and get what everyone else gets for Sex Ed? Just curious.


Good question.

[Mr. Kotter]

So, teen pregnancy is not really a problem then?


Making one mistake is one thing; compounding it, possibly.....another.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Did she have that? Or did she go to public school and get what everyone else gets for Sex Ed? Just curious.

I'm sure her mother, who advocates AO in education and is in government, never spoke to her of such things.

[BucEyedPea]

I'm sure her mother, who advocates AO in education and is in government, never spoke to her of such things.

Butcha' can't prove it!

[BucEyedPea]

My goodness listen to the left, running their morality on mother for not teaching her their values regarding what sex education should consist of. :shake:

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Butcha' can't prove it!

So she just espouses these views to the voting public then, but doesn't practice them at home? ;)

She'll fit right in with the Haggards and Craigs of the world :D

[BucEyedPea]

Making one mistake is one thing; compounding it, possibly.....another.

It happened to my cousin, a tad older... think it was 18, and they've been married at least 17 years now.

[keg in kc]

I think it could be interesting to watch the reaction to this. I could be wrong, but I imagine the religious right would absolutely crucify a democratic candidate with a kid in the same condition.

I hope, however, it really is a non-issue, as it should be.

[banyon]

18 and 16 are pretty different.

[Mr. Kotter]

It happened to my cousin, a tad older... think it was 18, and they've been married at least 17 years now.


And that's the other side of this....she is engaged; don't know the timing of that.

[Mr. Kotter]

18 and 16 are pretty different.

She's 17.....

[Adept Havelock]

Abstinence only, FTW.

Heh. Imagine that, an educational policy predicated on playing "ostrich with it's head in the sand" that deals with a primal drive fails.

I put this in the Trig thread, but think it's worth repeating here.

IF true, I'll take it as another shining indicator of what a jeebus-fearin', socially conservative, abstinence-only upbringing can achieve.

:shrug:

I think it could be interesting to watch the reaction to this. I could be wrong, but I imagine the religious right would absolutely crucify a democratic candidate with a kid in the same condition.

I hope, however, it really is a non-issue, as it should be.

I imagine you're right, Dobson and his little Dobsonites would be screaming about it.

Aside from HJ's (IMO correct) assessment that A-O is worthless, I think it will be a non-issue.

[BucEyedPea]

So she just espouses these views to the voting public then, but doesn't practice them at home? ;)

She'll fit right in with the Haggards and Craigs of the world :D

My point was if she went to public school she'd have had both versions. So she would have known about the safe-sex version too. That means even if her Mom wanted otherwise, she could have still protected herself. Unless her Mom exempted her from those classes which we have no personal knowledge of.
My mom wanted that for me too and I didn't obey.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

My goodness listen to the left, running their morality on mother for not teaching her their values regarding what sex education should consist of. :shake:

Actually, the only people who argue that sex education has a moral element are the right wing psychos such as Palin, who comprise the 15% of the country who believes that is the method of instruction we should use.

Comprehensive sex ed is a matter of practicality and pragmatism, as well as an understanding of what human nature is actually like. Believe it or not, it's an evolutionary imperative to have sex...but since evolution is a myth and all, we can just forget those things called pheremones, hormones, and things like oxytocin, we'll just miracle our vaginas shut.

[Mr. Kotter]

I think it could be interesting to watch the reaction to this. I could be wrong, but I imagine the religious right would absolutely crucify a democratic candidate with a kid in the same condition.

I hope, however, it really is a non-issue, as it should be.

And I thought I was cynical. :rolleyes:

It would be, and should be, a non-issue, except for the partisan lunatic fringe in this.

[BucEyedPea]

Heh. Imagine that, an educational policy predicated on playing "ostrich with it's head in the sand" that deals with a primal drive fails spectacularly.

I put this in the Trig thread, but think it's worth repeating here.

Are we being lectured here, on someone's morality from an advocate that running such morality on others is wrong? See even a hedonist epicurean can't resist disseminating their moral code.

[HolmeZz]

She's 17.....

She might've been 16 when she had the wood laid to her.

[Mr. Kotter]

Heh. Imagine that, an educational policy predicated on playing "ostrich with it's head in the sand" that deals with a primal drive fails spectacularly.

I put this in the Trig thread, but think it's worth repeating here.



:shrug:

You got a link to indicate she was definitely a part of an abstinence only approach?

I suspect her education was more thorough, but I'm gonna give the kid the benefit of the doubt of course.

:shrug:

She might've been 16 when she had the wood laid to her.

Do you/we know yet? :shrug:

[Adept Havelock]

Believe it or not, it's an evolutionary imperative to have sex...but since evolution is a myth and all, we can just forget those things called pheremones, hormones, and things like oxytocin, we'll just miracle our vaginas shut.

LMAO

[BucEyedPea]

Actually, the only people who argue that sex education has a moral element are the right wing psychos such as Palin, who comprise the 15% of the country who believes that is the method of instruction we should use.

Comprehensive sex ed is a matter of practicality and pragmatism, as well as an understanding of what human nature is actually like. Believe it or not, it's an evolutionary imperative to have sex...but since evolution is a myth and all, we can just forget those things called pheremones, hormones, and things like oxytocin, we'll just miracle our vaginas shut.

Well, I didn't have it and I somehow found out about safe-sex anyway.
However, I was told if I ever became pregnant to not come home again.
That scared the b'jeezus outta me. My mom had her ways.

[keg in kc]

And I thought I was cynical. .I'm sure as hell cynical, but that doesn't have anything to do with my belief that the right would use this as a weapon if it was a child of Obama or Biden.

The usual M.O. would be to comfort and support one of their own, but to attack someone outside their fold without mercy or conscience.

[BCD]

Link? :shrug:Making, letting, same difference. People shouldn't get married just because they have a kid.

[Adept Havelock]

You got a link to indicate she was definitely a part of an abstinence only approach?

I suspect her education was more thorough, but I'm gonna give the kid the benefit of the doubt of course.

:shrug:



Do you/we know yet? :shrug:

I don't know if Alaska buys into that nonsense or not, so I'll amend it to "Another shining example of a jeebus/Beezus fearin, socially conservative" upbringing. :D

[Logical]

She might've been 16 when she had the wood laid to her.
I must say it would not have been all unpleasent to have laid wood to such a fine lass.

By the way anyone else note the fine biblical name of the poor lad being shotgunned into marriage.

[whoman69]

Really don't care, the fact that she was unable to raise her family to use protection, has no bearing on her ability to run a country.

Goes to the base of the pro-life that there are no options available. No birth control, abstinance only; let them live in ignorance.

[banyon]

She's 17.....

I've seen it printed both ways, I'd guess she had a recent birthdate.

[BucEyedPea]

Making, letting, same difference. People shouldn't get married just because they have a kid.

No but if they also love each other. I'd rather see that even if it doesn't work out later.

[Mr. Kotter]

Making, letting, same difference. People shouldn't get married just because they have a kid.

IYNSHO

;)

[Mr. Kotter]

....The usual M.O. would be to comfort and support one of their own, but to attack someone outside their fold without mercy or conscience.


You mean, like the left seems to be doing so far in this? :shrug:

Yeah. I guess I see your point.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Well, I didn't have it and I somehow found out about safe-sex anyway.
However, I was told if I ever became pregnant to not come home again.
That scared the b'jeezus outta me. My mom had her ways.

And I'm sure that the fear-laden message in no way subverts the indoctrinated's view towards CSE.

[BCD]

I want to know if people view this as defiling the sanctity of marriage. Absolutely not. Marriage should only be done out of love. My son's mom and I split when he was less than a year. She dumped me. The 2nd best thing she ever did for me...

[banyon]

Are we being lectured here, on someone's morality from an advocate that running such morality on others is wrong? See even a hedonist epicurean can't resist disseminating their moral code.

So the proposal then, is that we just teach nothing and pretend the issue doesn't exist?

Great it'll be just like the embargo act of 1807.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

You mean, like the left seems to be doing so far in this? :shrug:

Yeah. I guess I see your point.

Who the f*ck is attacking this girl? Seriously, where is this origin myth from?

No one is saying this is fodder for the campaign, nor should it be brought up in serious political discussion.

What it is, however, is humorous. Given that the people (like the Palins) who preach the politics of personal responsibility and AO education, and chain themselves to the antiquated social conservative movement can't even keep a leash on their own daughter. That's all it is...a joke.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Absolutely not. Marriage should only be done out of love. My son's mom and I split when he was less than a year. She dumped me. The 2nd best thing she ever did for me...

What then, is a marriage announced immediately after the daughter happens to reveal her pregnancy?

Does that not reek of at least a little circumstance?

That's all I'm saying :shrug:

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins View Post
I want to know if people view this as defiling the sanctity of marriage.
I don't think so. Afterall, in the old days you were automatically considered married if this was found out. Or even if caught kissing. Or even a girl just in a room alone with a non family male or getting any written correspondence while not yet engaged to the man. Scandaous. I tell you we've come a long way.

[keg in kc]

You mean, like the left seems to be doing so far in this?I don't particularly care what goes on in this thread.

Speaking with reporters in Monroe, Mich., today, Barack Obama said candidates' families should be "off limits."

He wouldn't get that consideration if the situations were be reversed. In my opinion. McCain would descend on him like a vampire in the night, or at least try to.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

I just want to know why quickie shotgun weddings are morally acceptable and the demon homosexuals wanting marriage aren't...:shrug:

[BucEyedPea]

And I'm sure that the fear-laden message in no way subverts the indoctrinated's view towards CSE.

I'm doing the opposite with my daughter. No fear at all. If anything happens I want to know to help her. Her private school only had How Babies are Made type course around age 12. Nothing more. But, I am not going to demonstrate condoms or even fisting to her ( STFU) either.

[Taco John]

Actually, the only people who argue that sex education has a moral element are the right wing psychos such as Palin, who comprise the 15% of the country who believes that is the method of instruction we should use.

Comprehensive sex ed is a matter of practicality and pragmatism, as well as an understanding of what human nature is actually like. Believe it or not, it's an evolutionary imperative to have sex...but since evolution is a myth and all, we can just forget those things called pheremones, hormones, and things like oxytocin, we'll just miracle our vaginas shut.


I have a hunch that you're going to have the sluttiest daughter in school someday.

[Guru]

It is a non-issue. The only thing it does is further underscore how worthless AO education is. I must say it is ironic how well it worked out for them.
yeah, it never works. Everybody blows it in the end. Oh, wait, I'm living proof it can work.

[BucEyedPea]

I just want to know why quickie shotgun weddings are morally acceptable and the demon homosexuals wanting marriage aren't...:shrug:

Gives a baby a family name, and a mom and a dad.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Gives a baby a family name, and a mom and a dad.

So two gay individuals couldn't change to the same surname, nor could they adopt parenting roles?

That is retarded.
You are retarded.

[Logical]

Gives a baby a family name, and a mom and a dad.
Who will be fighting unmercifully by the time the kid is 3 and divorce probably by the time the kid is 7.

[Taco John]

So two gay individuals couldn't change to the same surname, nor could they adopt parenting roles?

That is retarded.
You are retarded.


She didn't say anything about gays. She answered your question about shotgun weddings, you radical goon.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

I have a hunch that you're going to have the sluttiest daughter in school someday.

If I breed, I'll actually be forthright with methods of protection as well as the realities of sex. I'm not going to go Reefer Madness on them and hope I can terror alert orange them into acceptance.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

She didn't say anything about gays. She answered your question about shotgun weddings, you radical goon.

And my retort was in no way proof that two gay individuals could do the same thing, thereby rebuffing her previous point...

ok.

[Taco John]

Who will be fighting unmercifully by the time the kid is 3 and divorce probably by the time the kid is 7.


My parents, who had me when they were 17, lasted 25 years. I'm thankful for every one of them.

[Taco John]

If I breed, I'll actually be forthright with methods of protection as well as the realities of sex. I'm not going to go Reefer Madness on them and hope I can terror alert orange them into acceptance.


So, like I said...

[penchief]

I think it could be interesting to watch the reaction to this. I could be wrong, but I imagine the religious right would absolutely crucify a democratic candidate with a kid in the same condition.

I hope, however, it really is a non-issue, as it should be.

I hope that this is the beginning of the end of republican hypocricy when it comes to personal issues. You'd think after Larry Craig, David Vitter, and others that they would have already backed off their holier-than-thou schtick. It isn't so much fun when it's being thrown back in one's face.

[BucEyedPea]

Hamas are you projecting about being retarded?
Or is that all you got?

[BucEyedPea]

Who will be fighting unmercifully by the time the kid is 3 and divorce probably by the time the kid is 7.

That can and does happen to those who have babies older too.
It's really their choice and they shouldn't be judged harshly for it.

[Taco John]

And my retort was in no way proof that two gay individuals could do the same thing, thereby rebuffing her previous point...

ok.

You're right. Your retort was in no way proof. And you're the one trying to turn this into a gay thing. Nobody cares about the relevance of the gay argument in this thread. Your hyper-liberal ass is trying to crowbar it into the discussion.

[banyon]

Just on a personal note I'll say that I just seem to meet a ton of women out here in Dodge City who all got knocked up at age 19-21 (or younger) and were divorced within a year.

I don't know if it's because the town is so boring there's nothing else to do, the lack of career options, or what. It was rare that I met women in Lawrence who were under 25 and had kids.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Hamas are you projecting about being retarded?
Or is that all you got?

Why don't you actually try and refute what I said rather than going with "I'm rubber and you're glue."

Just a thought.

[Logical]

My parents, who had me when they were 17, lasted 25 years. I'm thankful for every one of them.There are except as you know. I am really glad for you.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

You're right. Your retort was in no way proof. And you're the one trying to turn this into a gay thing. Nobody cares about the relevance of the gay argument in this thread. Your hyper-liberal ass is trying to crowbar it into the discussion.

Actually, it is surprisingly relevant

I hear social conservatives crow constantly about the sanctity of marriage, yet when a 17 year old gets knocked up, the first thing to do seems to be to enter into a marriage, as though that doesn't devalue the institution.

So once again, it's ok for people to use it as a salve against teh bastards, but we can't have gays defiling its unfouled and virginal barriers.

[Logical]

That can and does happen to those who have babies older too.
It's really their choice and they shouldn't be judged harshly for it.
I am not judging them, I am judging their parents that force the shotgun wedding. Who knows if that is the case here or not.

[Taco John]

With regards to the shotgun wedding: I don't care what anyone says - it is always superior for a kid to be raised with a mother and a father. I'm sure gay people can serve as good parents and role models. I have no problem with the idea that they can raise kids. But at the end of the day, it's my personal observation that kids who have both a mother and a father grow up to be better adjusted people - with apologies to people who didn't have this. I'm sure there are plenty of people who managed just fine without one or the other. But that doesn't change my observation.

[BucEyedPea]

I am not judging them, I am judging their parents that force the shotgun wedding. Who knows if that is the case here or not.

That's it we don't know. Maybe they all discussed it and that's what they really wanted.

[BucEyedPea]

Actually, it is surprisingly relevant

I hear social conservatives crow constantly about the sanctity of marriage, yet when a 17 year old gets knocked up, the first thing to do seems to be to enter into a marriage, as though that doesn't devalue the institution.

It's a matter of opinion if it devalues it.

[Logical]

That's it we don't know. Maybe they all discussed it and that's what they really wanted.
If so this is another example of how McCain/Palin keep messing up on little details. First their was no need for a Press Release on the subject, second if you are going to do one be thorough to avoid unwarranted speculation.

[BCD]

With regards to the shotgun wedding: I don't care what anyone says - it is always superior for a kid to be raised with a mother and a father. True, but if a couple cannot get along, they should not be together and should not subject the child to it.

[Taco John]

Actually, it is surprisingly relevant

Not even worth an eyebrow raise...

I hear social conservatives crow constantly about the sanctity of marriage, yet when a 17 year old gets knocked up, the first thing to do seems to be to enter into a marriage, as though that doesn't devalue the institution.

I don't see how it devalues the religious institution of marriage. Further, it's not for you to say whether it does or doesn't. You are a secular liberal who doesn't share their religious views. Your opinion on this (read these next two words carefully) doesn't count.


So once again, it's ok for people to use it as a salve against teh bastards, but we can't have gays defiling its unfouled and virginal barriers.

Blah blah blah liberal clap trap. I don't personally care if gays want to marry. I just find your attacks on actual religious marriage to be rather airy and insubstantial - born of ignorance.

I'm curious: were you the product of a marriage? Perhaps this could shed some light on why you seem to hate the institution.

[DeezNutz]

A gay marriage would still be classified as a "non-traditional union," no?

Just checking to make sure my terminology isn't anachronistic.

[BucEyedPea]

If so this is another example of how McCain/Palin keep messing up on little details. First their was no need for a Press Release on the subject, second if you are going to do one be thorough to avoid unwarranted speculation.

I actually don't really care about the Mac campaign or what they did. It's like arm chair QB'ing and 2nd guessing. I heard she told the campaign that her daughter was pregnant anyway. But I was talking about their whole family as well as the new parents not the campaign.

[Taco John]

A gay marriage would still be classified as a "non-traditional union," no?

Just checking to make sure my terminology isn't anachronistic.


Beats me. I don't care to get caught up in the logistics.

I consider marriage to be a traditional religious institution that the state has involved itself in. Once the state got involved, I believe that equal access should be given to everyone to reap the benefits. The cat's out of the bag on this one. Marriage is now a secular state sponsored institution, except in cases where the couple see their own marriage as a religious vow. But that determination belongs to the individual. They don't get any special rights to the word "marriage," any more than they get the rights to any other word.

[banyon]

With regards to the shotgun wedding: I don't care what anyone says - it is always superior for a kid to be raised with a mother and a father. I'm sure gay people can serve as good parents and role models. I have no problem with the idea that they can raise kids. But at the end of the day, it's my personal observation that kids who have both a mother and a father grow up to be better adjusted people - with apologies to people who didn't have this. I'm sure there are plenty of people who managed just fine without one or the other. But that doesn't change my observation.

I agree with this. For these reasons I was almost a party to a shotgun wedding. Like you though, I don't wish to impose these views on others.

[DeezNutz]

A gay marriage would still be classified as a "non-traditional union," no?

Just checking to make sure my terminology isn't anachronistic.

To follow up, assuming my language is still correct, this definition was and is one of the major reasons why many oppose gay marriage. It's not b/c of some perceived threat to one's own marriage or a sense of moral superiority, but rather that legalizing one "non-traditional union" becomes a slippery slope. What other "non-traditional unions" would then need to be considered?

Just an FYI. It seems that some were painting a rather narrow view of what is really a more nuanced argument than, "Gays are terrible."

[Reaper16]

To follow up, assuming my language is still correct, this definition was and is one of the major reasons why many oppose gay marriage. It's not b/c of some perceived threat to one's own marriage or a sense of moral superiority, but rather that legalizing one "non-traditional union" becomes a slippery slope. What other "non-traditional unions" would then need to be considered?

Just an FYI. It seems that some were painting a rather narrow view of what is really a more nuanced argument than, "Gays are terrible."
It's only considered "non-traditional" because of a warped and barbaric dehumanization of gays. I hear this argument all of the time; usually it comes down to the opponent of gay marriage fretting about how we'd have to legalize inter-species marriage, too.

I generally look at those making that kind of argument as vile, ultimately evil, people.

[SHTSPRAYER]

I don't know why the moonbats are all in a tizzy over this. This isn't any different from how Obama started out.

Except for the marriage part.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Not even worth an eyebrow raise...



I don't see how it devalues the religious institution of marriage. Further, it's not for you to say whether it does or doesn't. You are a secular liberal who doesn't share their religious views. Your opinion on this (read these next two words carefully) doesn't count.




Blah blah blah liberal clap trap. I don't personally care if gays want to marry. I just find your attacks on actual religious marriage to be rather airy and insubstantial - born of ignorance.

I'm curious: were you the product of a marriage? Perhaps this could shed some light on why you seem to hate the institution.

I was a product of a marriage, believe it or not.

Thank you though, for exposing your true colors. I point out the hypocrisy of people who are supposed to be entering into a union of love doing it for social convenience and now I hate marriage.

I must hate America too.

How Toby Keith of you.

[Reaper16]

I was a product of a marriage, believe it or not.

Thank you though, for exposing your true colors. I point out the hypocrisy of people who are supposed to be entering into a union of love doing it for social convenience and now I hate marriage.

I must hate America too.

How Toby Keith of you.
To be fair, Toby Keith supports gay marriage.

[BucEyedPea]

Hamas,
That marriage should be based on love is fine but not love alone. I think that is one of the frailties of modern views on marriage. Too idealistic, imo. It's always been an economic union and it still is even if love has been allowed for it, which is still a relatively new concept. ( 150 or so years) Anyone who only defines marriage as a love union is not really looking at it fully.

[DeezNutz]

It's only considered "non-traditional" because of a warped and barbaric dehumanization of gays. I hear this argument all of the time; usually it comes down to the opponent of gay marriage fretting about how we'd have to legalize inter-species marriage, too.

I generally look at those making that kind of argument as vile, ultimately evil, people.

Well, you're taking this to an extreme, to say the least.

The polygamist would provide a better example.

[Reaper16]

Hamas,
That marriage should be based on love is fine but not love alone. I think that is one of the frailties of modern views on marriage. Too idealistic, imo. It's always been an economic union and it still is even if love has been allowed for it, which is still a relatively new concept. ( 150 or so years) Anyone who only defines marriage as a love union is not really looking at it fully.
An economic union...

I suppose the "sanctity of marriage" is really all about the sanctity of money, then. That certainly explains why it's a Republican issue. :D

[Reaper16]

Well, you're taking this to an extreme, to say the least.

The polygamist would provide a better example.
Yes, but having seen this played out before, this argument usually only goes down to extremes.

I still maintain that looking at this as a comparison between "traditional" and "non-traditional" is the wrong way to go about it.

[Logical]

Hamas,
That marriage should be based on love is fine but not love alone. I think that is one of the frailties of modern views on marriage. Too idealistic, imo. It's always been an economic union and it still is even if love has been allowed for it, which is still a relatively new concept. ( 150 or so years) Anyone who only defines marriage as a love union is not really looking at it fully.So what did your dad give up to get you hitched, a mule and 4 pigs?

j/k

[Adept Havelock]

Well, you're taking this to an extreme, to say the least.

The polygamist would provide a better example.

As long as all involved are consenting adults, what's the problem? :shrug:

He's not taking this to an extreme. He's paraphrasing leading folks in the anti-gay marriage crusade like the unlamented former Sen. Santorum who equates Gay Marriage to "Man on Dog". :rolleyes:

[DeezNutz]

Yes, but having seen this played out before, this argument usually only goes down to extremes.

I still maintain that looking at this as a comparison between "traditional" and "non-traditional" is the wrong way to go about it.

For the record, I'm not trying to advocate a position. But these definitions would have to be thrown out completely to avoid going round and round.

Thus my original quesiton: Legally are same-sex unions defined as "non-traditional unions"? If so, things get sticky.

[Jenson71]

Public school teaching on sexuality is great - you are all animals and can not help yourselves, so just make sure you know about birth control.

[DeezNutz]

As long as all involved are consenting adults, what's the problem? :shrug:

He's not taking this to an extreme. He's paraphrasing leading folks in the anti-gay marriage crusade like the unlamented former Sen. Santorum who equates Gay Marriage to "Man on Dog". :rolleyes:

I was alluding to the language in the post, not necessarily the logic behind the argument.

[Adept Havelock]

Public school teaching on sexuality is great - you are all animals and can not help yourselves, so just make sure you know about birth control.

I see no evidence that we are not animals. Social, Tool-Using, with a superb level of communication and self-awareness, but animals none the less.

We can go feral, if not raised in "civilization" we act like other primates, what makes you think we aren't animals?

Impulse control? Heh.

Other animals learn that too. Ever watch an animal trainer? Our training is just a bit more sophisticated.

Also, the position of public school sex-ed is simply recognizing a Primal drive for what it is. That and teaching both "control" of it, as well as what to do if that drive is followed. Seems a bit more realistic than sticking your head in the sand like an ostrich and trying to deny one of the most powerful instincts/drives any animal possesses. Which, IMO, is the essence of the A-O approach.

I was alluding to the language in the post, not necessarily the logic behind the argument.

Extreme language is usually required to communicate an extreme viewpoint (like Santorum and other's absurd claim of same-sex marriage = Interspecies marriage). :shrug:

And as far as polygamy, as long as all are consenting adults, what's the problem?

[Reaper16]

I was alluding to the language in the post, not necessarily the logic behind the argument.
Perhaps I was extreme. But I really do feel that opponents of civil rights for gays practice dehumanization. It's barbaric, imo. If that's extreme, then I accept that (but I'll frown).

[VAChief]

With regards to the shotgun wedding: I don't care what anyone says - it is always superior for a kid to be raised with a mother and a father. I'm sure gay people can serve as good parents and role models. I have no problem with the idea that they can raise kids. But at the end of the day, it's my personal observation that kids who have both a mother and a father grow up to be better adjusted people - with apologies to people who didn't have this. I'm sure there are plenty of people who managed just fine without one or the other. But that doesn't change my observation.

I have counseled many kids and families from every situation imaginable. In my experience the best "environment" is the one that is the most functional and happy. It is of course preferrable for both parents to be in the same home without conflict and able to care for the child's needs.

The reality is that doesn't always happen when the parents are mismatched and the kids suffer often blaming themselves for the conflicts. I hope she loves this boy she is marrying and they are compatible for all concerned.

[Jenson71]

I see no evidence that we are not animals. Social, Tool-Using, with a superb level of communication and self-awareness, but animals none the less.

We can go feral, if not raised in "civilization" we act like other primates, what makes you think we aren't animals?

Impulse control? Heh.

Other animals learn that too. Ever watch an animal trainer? Our training is just a bit more sophisticated.

Oh, you mean there are similarities between humans and other animals, and we all fit into the same kingdom?

In that sense, we are. But in another sense, we are not. I guess I'm just a humanist, yes, I am a proud one. I believe in the dignity and value of human life. Philosophy, including that disgusting setback known as religion, aesthetics, language and with it, grammar, medicine, physics, astronomy, drama, ethics. These traits separate the human animal from the non-human.

Don't think of yourself as just an animal. The human race has progressed too far to let this next great intellectual development ("we don't matter") creep into our philosophy.

[DeezNutz]

Perhaps I was extreme. But I really do feel that opponents of civil rights for gays practice dehumanization. It's barbaric, imo. If that's extreme, then I accept that (but I'll frown).

I understand and respect your position.

The bolded, however, is different from those who oppose gay marriage.

[jettio]

One should take umbrage with the use of the term "shotgun wedding."

As we have heard six bajillion times since Friday, Palin has some command responsibilities for the Alaska National Guard.

We also know that Palin likes to throw her govermental weight around to settle family squabbles.

I think poor little Levi is facing a little more firepower than a shotgun right now.

[Reaper16]

I understand and respect your position.

The bolded, however, is different from those who oppose gay marriage.
And that's where we differ. If that makes me extreme, then I'm happy to be so.

[DeezNutz]

And that's where we differ. If that makes me extreme, then I'm happy to be so.

That's not extreme, IMO.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Hamas,
That marriage should be based on love is fine but not love alone. I think that is one of the frailties of modern views on marriage. Too idealistic, imo. It's always been an economic union and it still is even if love has been allowed for it, which is still a relatively new concept. ( 150 or so years) Anyone who only defines marriage as a love union is not really looking at it fully.

I don't disagree that it's not solely a love union. It's also a heteronormative institution.

Once again, you try and use outdated terms to discuss the present, though. The only people who marry in modern society for the economic or the social benefits of it are sociopaths (gold diggers, for one).

The last time I checked, Western countries usually don't practice the ritual of a dowry.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Oh, you mean there are similarities between humans and other animals, and we all fit into the same kingdom?

In that sense, we are. But in another sense, we are not. I guess I'm just a humanist, yes, I am a proud one. I believe in the dignity and value of human life. Philosophy, including that disgusting setback known as religion, aesthetics, language and with it, grammar, medicine, physics, astronomy, drama, ethics. These traits separate the human animal from the non-human.

Don't think of yourself as just an animal. The human race has progressed too far to let this next great intellectual development ("we don't matter") creep into our philosophy.

And yet the Military can increase firing rates of soldiers from 15% in WWII to 95% in Vietnam through the same kind of operant and classical conditioning that B.F. Skinner and Pavlov used on their subjects.

[SHTSPRAYER]

Actually, the only people who argue that sex education has a moral element are the right wing psychos such as Palin, who comprise the 15% of the country who believes that is the method of instruction we should use.



What about black men being better fathers? Isn't that what B.O. said to the NAACP a few months ago?

Maybe he shouldn't have said that, because only a "psycho" would expect black men to start being better fathers.

That is exactly what you are saying about Palin because her daughter got pregnant. Let's not try to set standards or teach our children right from wrong, because they might screw up.

You called people "retards" in this thread and you called people "psychos" in this thread, and you posted probably more than anybody else in this thread.

What makes you an expert on this or anything else?

AND WHERE ARE ALL THE WASHROOM HENS CRYING ABOUT ME CALLING PEOPLE MOONBATS AND TRYING TO GET ME BANNED WHEN THIS GUY IS PULLING THE CRAP HE IS PULLING.

:cuss:

['Hamas' Jenkins]

What about black men being better fathers? Isn't that what B.O. said to the NAACP a few months ago?

Maybe he shouldn't have said that, because only a "psycho" would expect black men to start being better fathers.

That is exactly what you are saying about Palin because her daughter got pregnant. Let's not try to set standards or teach our children right from wrong, because they might screw up.

You called people "retards" in this thread and you called people "psychos" in this thread, and you posted probably more than anybody else in this thread.

What makes you an expert on this or anything else?

AND WHERE ARE ALL THE WASHROOM HENS CRYING ABOUT ME CALLING PEOPLE MOONBATS AND TRYING TO GET ME BANNED WHEN THIS GUY IS PULLING THE CRAP HE IS PULLING.

:cuss:

People who believe in abstinence only education and think that it is efficacious are retards. It's indisputable that it doesn't work, and yet in spite of this, people place their desire to believe an ancient book ahead of empirical evidence.

How is that not psychotically misguided?

[SHTSPRAYER]

People who believe in abstinence only education and think that it is efficacious are retards. It's indisputable that it doesn't work, and yet in spite of this, people place their desire to believe an ancient book ahead of empirical evidence.

How is that not psychotically misguided?


Let me see if I follow your logic (or lack thereof)...

When I was 15 years old, and I went to go meet up with my friends, my parents told me "do not drink alcohol" and when I came home drunk anyway, they should have stopped trying to prevent me from drinking alcohol?

It's about standards. You set standards and hope that your teenager can live up to them. I was a kid, you were a kid, we all were kids AND WE ALL DID STUPID THINGS IN SPITE OF THE GUIDANCE FROM OUR PARENTS.

The difference between my VP candidate and your Prez candidate, is when Palin's daughter made a "mistake", she gave her daughter support to have the child. Your candidate is on record saying if his daughter made a "mistake" that she shouldn't be punished with it.

He would have it exterminated.

Have a good night.

[Adept Havelock]

Oh, you mean there are similarities between humans and other animals, and we all fit into the same kingdom?

In that sense, we are. But in another sense, we are not. I guess I'm just a humanist, yes, I am a proud one. I believe in the dignity and value of human life. Philosophy, including that disgusting setback known as religion, aesthetics, language and with it, grammar, medicine, physics, astronomy, drama, ethics. These traits separate the human animal from the non-human.

Don't think of yourself as just an animal. The human race has progressed too far to let this next great intellectual development ("we don't matter") creep into our philosophy.
Heh.

I don't think of myself as just an animal, but as an extraordinary animal.

However, an extraordinary animal is still an animal. Just higher up the food chain than most. ;)

As far as "we don't matter"...compared to the vastness of the multiverse, we don't, really. I'm OK with that. Humanity as a whole could disappear tomorrow, and the vast Universe wouldn't even bat an eye. We'd be just another species that didn't make it through a bottleneck.

Sorry Jenson, I'm an egotistical bastage, but I'm not that much of an egomaniac. I can't believe that a few billion primates scratching out an existence in a thin smear of biosphere on a small ball of rock has any real significance when set against that scale.

No significance beyond the fact I'm one of those primates, that is.

If it happens and we fade away, it'll be a damn waste of potential. JMO.


I'm a little surprised you state religion is a "disgusting setback". I don't believe that.

[VAChief]

What about black men being better fathers? Isn't that what B.O. said to the NAACP a few months ago?

Maybe he shouldn't have said that, because only a "psycho" would expect black men to start being better fathers.

That is exactly what you are saying about Palin because her daughter got pregnant. Let's not try to set standards or teach our children right from wrong, because they might screw up.

You called people "retards" in this thread and you called people "psychos" in this thread, and you posted probably more than anybody else in this thread.

What makes you an expert on this or anything else?

AND WHERE ARE ALL THE WASHROOM HENS CRYING ABOUT ME CALLING PEOPLE MOONBATS AND TRYING TO GET ME BANNED WHEN THIS GUY IS PULLING THE CRAP HE IS PULLING.

:cuss:

The best I can offer you is indifference. You have shown me nothing to support.

[SHTSPRAYER]

The best I can offer you is indifference. You have shown me nothing to support.


70% of black children are born out of wedlock. Less than 12% of American women are black, yet they account for 35% of all abortions.

This tells me that if you are a black woman in America today, who gets pregnant, you have two choices: Have an abortion or have children out of wedlock.

Who's responsible for this?

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Let me see if I follow your logic (or lack thereof)...

When I was 15 years old, and I went to go meet up with my friends, my parents told me "do not drink alcohol" and when I came home drunk anyway, they should have stopped trying to prevent me from drinking alcohol?

It's about standards. You set standards and hope that your teenager can live up to them. I was a kid, you were a kid, we all were kids AND WE ALL DID STUPID THINGS IN SPITE OF THE GUIDANCE FROM OUR PARENTS.

The difference between my VP candidate and your Prez candidate, is when Palin's daughter made a "mistake", she gave her daughter support to have the child. Your candidate is on record saying if his daughter made a "mistake" that she shouldn't be punished with it.

He would have it exterminated.

Have a good night.


Good lord. It is an evolutionary imperative to have sex. You can have sex and be relatively consequence free if you protect yourself.

Basically what your parents would have done is say "Don't drink" and then just assume that if you were to drink, you'd know enough not to drive drunk.

Don't be an idiot.

[Nightfyre]

I KNEW IT!
http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=190107&page=14

[Guru]

People who believe in abstinence only education and think that it is efficacious are retards. It's indisputable that it doesn't work, and yet in spite of this, people place their desire to believe an ancient book ahead of empirical evidence.

How is that not psychotically misguided?
Indisputable? BS

I don't plan on abstinence only with my kids but it will be the primary teaching. But it worked perfectly for me. And I guaran****ingtee you it works on plenty of others.

Quit throwing around your baseless facts and demeaning a value that several people still have.

[Adept Havelock]

Good lord. It is an evolutionary imperative to have sex. You can have sex and be relatively consequence free if you protect yourself.

Basically what your parents would have done is say "Don't drink" and then just assume that if you were to drink, you'd know enough not to drive drunk.

Don't be an idiot.

QFT

[BucEyedPea]

Hey Hamas, I was checking out some stats on CSE and AO, which has far fewer studies on it. But even Gloucester High, Mass where they had sexEd there was a 4x increase in pregnancies because the girls made a pregnancy pact. Still, it's 1 in 13 girls that becomes pregnant. And even with CSE only 27.5 % girls used a condom with males at 47.8%. That's nothing to boast about either. ( Mathematic Policy Research, Inc- a non partisan firm)

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Indisputable? BS

I don't plan on abstinence only with my kids but it will be the primary teaching. But it worked perfectly for me. And I guaran****ingtee you it works on plenty of others.

Quit throwing around your baseless facts and demeaning a value that several people still have.

Abstinence-only education has been criticized in official statements by the American Psychological Association,[15] the American Medical Association,[16] the National Association of School Psychologists,[17] the Society for Adolescent Medicine,[18] the American College Health Association,[18] the American Academy of Pediatrics,[19] and the American Public Health Association,[20] which all maintain that sex education needs to be comprehensive to be effective.

The AMA "urges schools to implement comprehensive... sexuality education programs that... include an integrated strategy for making condoms available to students and for providing both factual information and skill-building related to reproductive biology, sexual abstinence, sexual responsibility, contraceptives including condoms, alternatives in birth control, and other issues aimed at prevention of pregnancy and sexual transmission of diseases... [and] opposes the sole use of abstinence-only education..."[16]

The American Academy of Pediatrics states that "Abstinence-only programs have not demonstrated successful outcomes with regard to delayed initiation of sexual activity or use of safer sex practices... Programs that encourage abstinence as the best option for adolescents, but offer a discussion of HIV prevention and contraception as the best approach for adolescents who are sexually active, have been shown to delay the initiation of sexual activity and increase the proportion of sexually active adolescents who reported using birth control."[19]

On August 4, 2007, the British Medical Journal published an editorial concluding that there is "no evidence" that abstinence-only sex education programs "reduce risky sexual behaviours, incidence of sexually transmitted infections, or pregnancy" in "high income countries".[21]

A comprehensive review of 115 program evaluations published in November 2007 by the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy found that two-thirds of sex education programs focusing on both abstinence and contraception had a positive effect on teen sexual behavior. The same study found no strong evidence that abstinence-only programs delayed the initiation of sex, hastened the return to abstinence, or reduced the number of sexual partners


What do they know, they're only medical doctors and psychologists.

This is the problem You let your "values" get in the way of your brain.

[Logical]

Hey Hamas, I was checking out some stats on CSE and AO, which has far fewer studies on it. But even Gloucester High, Mass where they had sexEd there was a 4x increase in pregnancies because the girls made a pregnancy pact. Still, it's 1 in 13 girls that becomes pregnant. And even with CSE only 27.5 % girls used a condom with males at 47.8%. That's nothing to boast about either. ( Mathematic Policy Research, Inc- a non partisan firm)Women should not have to use condoms, just give them a small household garbage bag and tell them to exercise their pubococcygeus muscles.

[Logical]

Indisputable? BS

I don't plan on abstinence only with my kids but it will be the primary teaching. But it worked perfectly for me. And I guaran****ingtee you it works on plenty of others.

Quit throwing around your baseless facts and demeaning a value that several people still have.No shit you were a really old virgin, no wonder you have all the hangups you do. That is just not natural.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Comprehensive sex ed may cut teen pregnancies

http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSTON47250120080324

By Amy Norton

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Comprehensive sex education that includes discussion of birth control may help reduce teen pregnancies, while abstinence-only programs seem to fall short, the results of a U.S. survey suggest.

Using data from a 2002 national survey, researchers found that among more than 1,700 unmarried, heterosexual teens between 15 and 19 years old, those who'd received comprehensive sex ed in school were 60 percent less likely to have been pregnant or gotten someone pregnant than teens who'd had no formal sex education.

Meanwhile, there was no clear benefit from abstinence-only education in preventing pregnancy or delaying sexual intercourse, the researchers report in the Journal of Adolescent Health.

The study found that teens who'd been through abstinence-only programs were less likely than those who'd received no sex ed to have been pregnant. However, the difference was not significant in statistical terms, which means the finding could have been due to chance.

In addition, there was no evidence that comprehensive sex education increased the likelihood of teen sex or boosted rates of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) -- a concern of people who oppose teaching birth control in schools.

While comprehensive sex ed did not clearly reduce the STD risk, there was a modest, but statistically insignificant reduced risk of engaging in sex. The abstinence-only approach had no effect on either factor, the researchers found.

"The bottom line is that there is strong evidence that comprehensive sex education is more effective than abstinence-only education at preventing teen pregnancies," said lead researcher Pamela K. Kohler, of the Center for AIDS and STD at the University of Washington in Seattle

Currently, the federal government champions the abstinence-only approach, giving around $170 million each year to states and community groups to teach kids to say no to sex. This funding precludes mention of birth control and condoms, unless it is to emphasize their failure rates.

Critics have long pointed out that studies have failed to show that abstinence-only education delays sex or lowers rates of teen pregnancy.

The current study is the first to compare the effects of comprehensive sex ed and abstinence-only education in a national survey, Kohler noted.

Of the teens in the study, two thirds said they had received comprehensive sex education, while about one quarter had had abstinence-only courses. Just under 10 percent said they'd received no formal sex education.

There is now a body of evidence showing that the comprehensive approach may cut the odds of teen pregnancy, without increasing the likelihood of teens having sex, according to Kohler.

However, she added, "there seems to be a gap between scientific evidence and policy change."

SOURCE: Journal of Adolescent Health, April 2008.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

In addition, three recent Guttmacher Institute studies found that:

* One in three teens currently get no education about birth control at all, and of those who do, many do not get it when they need it most—before they start to have sex.
* Improved contraceptive use and use of more effective birth control methods—not teens abstaining from sex—are responsible for 86% of the recent declines in teen pregnancy.
* More than nine in 10 Americans have sex before marriage, and have done so for generations.

[Guru]

HJ, it is the point that you keep throwing products of it under your bus. You have a serious being right issue. I was a virgin till marriage. Damn proud of it and better off for it. As was my wife. HOLY SHIT!!! Two people that waited until marriage in your completely impossible world.

[go bowe]

It's only considered "non-traditional" because of a warped and barbaric dehumanization of gays. I hear this argument all of the time; usually it comes down to the opponent of gay marriage fretting about how we'd have to legalize inter-species marriage, too.

I generally look at those making that kind of argument as vile, ultimately evil, people.eh...

inter-species marriages are overrated...

i tried one once and it was not a pretty sight...

[Guru]

This is the problem You let your "values" get in the way of your brain.

I'll take my values over yours any day. I don't feel you have any values anyway. All you do is trash everyones values who don't agree with yours. What a great value.

[jettio]

As with any good thing, Abstinence is only effective if practiced in moderation.

Since the topics are sex and pregnancy. Lets apply the abstinence in moderation theory to those topics.

If the intent is to not get pregnant and to command a higher marriage price with an intact maidenhead. The best use of abstinence would be to abstain from coitus in both the plain and fancy varieties. In other words, abstain from heterosexual intercourse.

The example of excessive abstinence having the opposite effect is the abstinence squared theory.

Let's say if you were effectively abstaining from heterosexual intercourse and you added another layer of abstinence to the point where you began to abstain from your abstinence from heterosexual intercourse. That is precisely the moment when the f*cking starts.

In other words, abstinence-only sexual education works as long as you don't double down on the abstinence.

[Logical]

LMAOAs with any good thing, Abstinence is only effective if practiced in moderation.

Since the topics are sex and pregnancy. Lets apply the abstinence in moderation theory to those topics.

If the intent is to not get pregnant and to command a higher marriage price with an intact maidenhead. The best use of abstinence would be to abstain from coitus in both the plain and fancy varieties. In other words, abstain from heterosexual intercourse.

The example of excessive abstinence having the opposite effect is the abstinence squared theory.

Let's say if you were effectively abstaining from heterosexual intercourse and you added another layer of abstinence to the point where you begain to abstain from your abstinence from heterosexual intercourse. That is precisley the moment when the f*cking starts.

In other words, abstinence-only sexual education works as long as you don't double down on the abstinence.
LMAO...You are really on a roll.

[J Diddy]

I'll take my values over yours any day. I don't feel you have any values anyway. All you do is trash everyones values who don't agree with yours. What a great value.



I value the value of a good value. I went into walmart the other day and saw a great value valued at $100, I of course acquired the value but I had to take it back because gas at $4 a gallon is not a great value.

[Adept Havelock]

As with any good thing, Abstinence is only effective if practiced in moderation.

Since the topics are sex and pregnancy. Lets apply the abstinence in moderation theory to those topics.

If the intent is to not get pregnant and to command a higher marriage price with an intact maidenhead. The best use of abstinence would be to abstain from coitus in both the plain and fancy varieties. In other words, abstain from heterosexual intercourse.

The example of excessive abstinence having the opposite effect is the abstinence squared theory.

Let's say if you were effectively abstaining from heterosexual intercourse and you added another layer of abstinence to the point where you began to abstain from your abstinence from heterosexual intercourse. That is precisely the moment when the f*cking starts.

In other words, abstinence-only sexual education works as long as you don't double down on the abstinence.

LMAO

Is it bad that what (s)he just said makes perfect sense to me?
;)
I'll take my values over yours any day. I don't feel you have any values anyway. All you do is trash everyones values who don't agree with yours. What a great value.

:hmmm:

If he doesn't have any values, how can anyone else's not agree with his?

How can we disagree with something that doesn't exist in the first place?

[Guru]

I value the value of a good value. I went into walmart the other day and saw a great value valued at $100, I of course acquired the value but I had to take it back because gas at $4 a gallon is not a great value.
But you valued the value. Thats the important thing.:clap::D

[BucEyedPea]

If the intent is to not get pregnant and to command a higher marriage price with an intact maidenhead.

Never heard that word before. What does it mean?

[J Diddy]

But you valued the value. Thats the important thing.:clap::D


now i'm deflated and my property value is deflated

[J Diddy]

LMAO


;)


:hmmm:

If he doesn't have any values, how can anyone else's not agree with his?

How can we disagree with something that doesn't exist in the first place?

That is a tough question that I might ponder asking the tooth fairy when I see her again. Make it tomorrow my son needs some teeth knocked out anyway and I'm curious.

[jettio]

Never heard that word before. What does it mean?

I would tell you to google it, but that is exactly why you don't have one anymore.

[go bowe]

What about black men being better fathers? Isn't that what B.O. said to the NAACP a few months ago?

Maybe he shouldn't have said that, because only a "psycho" would expect black men to start being better fathers.

That is exactly what you are saying about Palin because her daughter got pregnant. Let's not try to set standards or teach our children right from wrong, because they might screw up.

You called people "retards" in this thread and you called people "psychos" in this thread, and you posted probably more than anybody else in this thread.

What makes you an expert on this or anything else?

AND WHERE ARE ALL THE WASHROOM HENS CRYING ABOUT ME CALLING PEOPLE MOONBATS AND TRYING TO GET ME BANNED WHEN THIS GUY IS PULLING THE CRAP HE IS PULLING.

:cuss:getting banned around here is actually quite hard to do...

unless your name is gochiefs or Tom Cash...

political discussions only get you segregated to dc, not banned...

you could be the president of the charles manson fan club and still not get banned for your political views...

btw, what washroom do you go to, anyway? i've never heard of hens in the washroom...

but it does sound kinky...

omg, can you imagine having sex with bats from the moon?

talk about inter-species unions...

[Pittsie]

Never heard that word before. What does it mean?

It's a synonym for teh hymen.

[Ari Chi3fs]

This lady has grandbabies all over the place.

[Ari Chi3fs]

All women should take a facial to end sex.

[Ari Chi3fs]

But that is a different thread altogether.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

HJ, it is the point that you keep throwing products of it under your bus. You have a serious being right issue. I was a virgin till marriage. Damn proud of it and better off for it. As was my wife. HOLY SHIT!!! Two people that waited until marriage in your completely impossible world.

I'd like to see a statistical refutation of the efficacy of Comprehensive Sex Ed, please, not the experiences of one person.

Although, I do respect your logic. I never lynched a black man as a youth, so it must have never been a problem, right?

FWIW, you don't seem to have a very solid grasp of probability. The issue isn't that people will universally have sex pre-marriage, but 90% do. With that being the case, hedging your bets that your kids will be the 1/10 is pretty dim-witted, IMO. It's the same reason why 2% of the population is comprised of sociopaths, but 2% of the population isn't in prison for violent crimes. Are they pre-disposed to it? Hell yes. Is it axiomatic? No. But signs do point to that population being more likely to commit violent crimes, just like statistics and this little thing called science point to the strong mathematical probability of your, and 9/10 people's children, of having sex pre-marriage.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

I'll take my values over yours any day. I don't feel you have any values anyway. All you do is trash everyones values who don't agree with yours. What a great value.

The only thing I trash is the use of "values" over actually thinking, because it's intellectual cowardice.

Now lean forward and choke yourself.

[irishjayhawk]

A great Indexed post:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_FBXGhy-QmVw/SLw1VVK_E-I/AAAAAAAAB-4/zuZNP_duk0o/s320/card1759.JPG

[Guru]

The only thing I trash is the use of "values" over actually thinking, because it's intellectual cowardice.

Now lean forward and choke yourself.
I forgot, Hamas' way is the only way. Hamas is a God to himself. Enjoy your reign. Values and actually thinking work hand in hand. If you can't see that you are no longer worth my time.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

I forgot, Hamas' way is the only way. Hamas is a God to himself. Enjoy your reign. Values and actually thinking work hand in hand. If you can't see that you are no longer worth my time.

If you mean ethics, then I'd agree with you. What I don't agree with are "values" as defined by the right which is just another code word for the adoption of a narrow interpretation of Christian ideology (and an inaccurate one if actually going by the teachings of the religion's namesake).

[irishjayhawk]

I forgot, Hamas' way is the only way. Hamas is a God to himself. Enjoy your reign. Values and actually thinking work hand in hand. If you can't see that you are no longer worth my time.

I have to side with Hamas here.

Just because you waited until marriage and it worked doesn't mean it will. Statistics are not on your side.

Would you agree with that?

['Hamas' Jenkins]

I have to side with Hamas here.

Just because you waited until marriage and it worked doesn't mean it will. Statistics are not on your side.

Would you agree with that?

moonbat.

[ROYC75]

The only thing I trash is the use of "values" over actually thinking, because it's intellectual cowardice.

Now lean forward and choke yourself.


All the good teachings and programs can not make all kids make the right choice and follow certain values & morals when the kid is determined to make their own choice. Failure in this respect starts with the kid more than the parent when all the teachings were present.

Liberals are making a bigger issue out of this than needed. Thousands of kids engage in sexual relations at an early age, Hey, we had a POTUS even doing it in office. Liberals then said it was no big deal, just a BJ. Seriously , it's a family issue ........not a political issue with the kid.

Let the lawmakers call it to session when they get back to work if it concerns them so much. Teenagers getting pregnant is all across the country......

[Guru]

I have to side with Hamas here.

Just because you waited until marriage and it worked doesn't mean it will. Statistics are not on your side.

Would you agree with that?

All I am saying is that it does not need to be abandoned. I still can work. I will be pushing abstinence but still plan on going over the other options. I am on record with that too.

What drives me nuts with Hamas is his way is the only way regardless of who you are. He loves to belittle anyone who doesn't agree 100% with him rather than offer a tad bit of respect to what others believe. His lack of respect has caused me to lose all respect for him. He would rather call people names than have a civil discussion with anyone.

I've no problem with your statement though. Didn't even disagree with that premise. Just disagree that it is impossible.

[J Diddy]

I forgot, Hamas' way is the only way. Hamas is a God to himself. Enjoy your reign. Values and actually thinking work hand in hand. If you can't see that you are no longer worth my time.


you my boy blue, I don't agree with you, but I think it's commendable

[irishjayhawk]

All the good teachings and programs can not make all kids make the right choice and follow certain values & morals when the kid is determined to make their own choice. Failure in this respect starts with the kid more than the parent when all the teachings were present.

Liberals are making a bigger issue out of this than needed. Thousands of kids engage in sexual relations at an early age, Hey, we had a POTUS even doing it in office. Liberals then said it was no big deal, just a BJ. Seriously , it's a family issue ........not a political issue with the kid.

Let the lawmakers call it to session when they get back to work if it concerns them so much. Teenagers getting pregnant is all across the country......

So, what exactly was the point of that?

[ROYC75]

I have to side with Hamas here.

Just because you waited until marriage and it worked doesn't mean it will. Statistics are not on your side.

Would you agree with that?

It's true that a large majority of teenagers that get married early , due to pregnancy is a rather high rate. Yes, many get divorced because they are not ready .But we have discussed this over and over, teaching them at home, school, churches, etc. is all you can do . The kids themselves put themselves into this, even when the parents teaches them differently. It's simple, teach them that something is wrong and they only want to try it, experiment for themselves to find out.

[J Diddy]

All I am saying is that it does not need to be abandoned. I still can work. I will be pushing abstinence but still plan on going over the other options. I am on record with that too.

What drives me nuts with Hamas is his way is the only way regardless of who you are. He loves to belittle anyone who doesn't agree 100% with him rather than offer a tad bit of respect to what others believe. His lack of respect has caused me to lose all respect for him. He would rather call people names than have a civil discussion with anyone.

I've no problem with your statement though. Didn't even disagree with that premise. Just disagree that it is impossible.

I agree it should be the first option but not the only way discussed.

[irishjayhawk]

It's true that a large majority of teenagers that get married early , due to pregnancy is a rather high rate. But we have discussed this over and over, teaching them at home, school, churches, etc. is all you can do . The kids themselves put themselves into this, even when the parents teaches them differently. It's simple, teach them that something is wrong and they only want to try it, experiment for themselves to find out.

The best way to get someone to do something is to say they can't.

[Guru]

I agree it should be the first option but not the only way discussed.
That, we agree on.:)

[J Diddy]

The best way to get someone to do something is to say they can't.


Then there's some people around here I'm gonna say can't shut up.

[ROYC75]

So, what exactly was the point of that?

Many here are wanting to lay the blame on the Palins, I disagree ....... It's a family issue. The liberal press is making a bigger issue out of it.

I watch a piece on CNN, Wolf Blitzer was arguing it when another commentator agreed with Obama that it was a family issue. Wolf kept pushing it that it was Palins fault and that the story should be seen and heard on the news.

[ROYC75]

The best way to get someone to do something is to say they can't.

Yep and most times, that person knows it wrong, but does it anyway....... How much more can we as parents do to teach the young kids about responsible sex ?

What can be done that already isn't being done ?

[irishjayhawk]

Many here are wanting to lay the blame on the Palins, I disagree ....... It's a family issue. The liberal press is making a bigger issue out of it.

I watch a piece on CNN, Wolf Blitzer was arguing it when another commentator agreed with Obama that it was a family issue. Wolf kept pushing it that it was Palins fault and that the story should be seen and heard on the news.

No, her being pregnant is not the issue.

The issue is that she supports AO education. She's firmly on that side of the fence. And, yet, her own family reflects the stats that say AO doesn't work.

That's the issue.

[irishjayhawk]

Yep and most times, that person knows it wrong, but does it anyway....... How much more can we as parents do to teach the young kids about responsible sex ?

What can be done that already isn't being done ?

Right. There isn't anything. That's why we shouldn't be funding stupid programs like AO education when they statistically fail. In fact, they are an epic failure.

[Ugly Duck]

It's a family issue. The liberal press is making a bigger issue out of it.

Oh hey c'mon now folks.... ask yourselves what wudda happened if Chelsea Clinton was pregnant in the White House - all the Right Wingers that are now crying "Family Issue!" wudda been slinging the smack up one side & down the other. We all know that to be true....

[Guru]

Oh hey c'mon now folks.... ask yourselves what wudda happened if Chelsea Clinton was pregnant in the White House - all the Right Wingers that are now crying "Family Issue!" wudda been slinging the smack up one side & down the other. We all know that to be true....

Of course they would. They would be wrong for it too.

[ROYC75]

Right. There isn't anything. That's why we shouldn't be funding stupid programs like AO education when they statistically fail. In fact, they are an epic failure.

It is a failure....... you should have heard Wolf Blitzer today. He was a real ass about the issue.

[Ugly Duck]

Actually, the only people who argue that sex education has a moral element are the right wing psychos such as Palin, who comprise the 15% of the country who believes that is the method of instruction we should use.

Comprehensive sex ed is a matter of practicality and pragmatism, as well as an understanding of what human nature is actually like. Believe it or not, it's an evolutionary imperative to have sex...but since evolution is a myth and all, we can just forget those things called pheremones, hormones, and things like oxytocin, we'll just miracle our vaginas shut.

I've got it... just teach kids how to AO with protection!

[irishjayhawk]

It is a failure....... you should have heard Wolf Blitzer today. He was a real ass about the issue.

So you don't think we should fund it, right?

[ROYC75]

So you don't think we should fund it, right?

I do think it is a waste of money, YES, kids are going to do what they want, no matter how much you teach them or spend on it .

Some of the most radical,wild child kids I have ever seen were preachers sons and daughters...... They are taught and know better, but temptations are greater than wisdom.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

All I am saying is that it does not need to be abandoned. I still can work. I will be pushing abstinence but still plan on going over the other options. I am on record with that too.

What drives me nuts with Hamas is his way is the only way regardless of who you are. He loves to belittle anyone who doesn't agree 100% with him rather than offer a tad bit of respect to what others believe. His lack of respect has caused me to lose all respect for him. He would rather call people names than have a civil discussion with anyone.

I've no problem with your statement though. Didn't even disagree with that premise. Just disagree that it is impossible.

Whatever, dude. I respect your autonomy to have a discussion with your kids about whatever you want, but if you aren't including contraceptives and the realities of sex into it, you're doing your own family a disservice.

Yes, abstinence can be a part of a sex ed curriculum. But having it be the ONLY part of a sex ed curriculum is about as intelligent as sending your kid over to Iraq and saying "Well, I could get you body armor, but just don't get shot."

Personally, I'm also a sex positive person, so I don't understand the incessant demonization of a natural and healthy human process that can be safely performed by informed parties.

[DaneMcCloud]

Many here are wanting to lay the blame on the Palins, I disagree ....... It's a family issue. The liberal press is making a bigger issue out of it.

Roy, as always, just contradicted yourself.

Is it a "family issue", i.e. the Palins? Or is it not the Palin's fault?

Whiskey.Tango.Foxtrot.

This isn't a "Liberal Press" issue, it's a NATIONAL ISSUE.

If this woman hadn't just been chosen to the Vice Presidential running mate of John McCain's, nobody and I mean NOBODY would give a flying ****.

Does any of this register with you? Or do you just spew bullshit all day?

[J Diddy]

Roy, as always, just contradicted yourself.

Is it a "family issue", i.e. the Palins? Or is it not the Palin's fault?

Whiskey.Tango.Foxtrot.

This isn't a "Liberal Press" issue, it's a NATIONAL ISSUE.

If this woman hadn't just been chosen to the Vice Presidential running mate of John McCain's, nobody and I mean NOBODY would give a flying ****.

Does any of this register with you? Or do you just spew bullshit all day?



lol you're on a roll

that air conditioner just fell off your big ass house, didn't it/

[DaneMcCloud]

lol you're on a roll

that air conditioner just fell off your big ass house, didn't it/

ROFL

[Smed1065]

Abstinence only, FTW.

It was Immaculate Conception.

[J Diddy]

Whatever, dude. I respect your autonomy to have a discussion with your kids about whatever you want, but if you aren't including contraceptives and the realities of sex into it, you're doing your own family a disservice.

Yes, abstinence can be a part of a sex ed curriculum. But having it be the ONLY part of a sex ed curriculum is about as intelligent as sending your kid over to Iraq and saying "Well, I could get you body armor, but just don't get shot."

Personally, I'm also a sex positive person, so I don't understand the incessant demonization of a natural and healthy human process that can be safely performed by informed parties.


I don't think he ever meant abstinence was the only part of his sex ed pla


lol at "sex positive" much better than having a sex deficit

[Smed1065]

Check the poles. Oops, she already did.

http://scosoft.com/h/k/13d7178d.gif

[Jenson71]

I'm a little surprised you state religion is a "disgusting setback". I don't believe that.

I don't believe it either. In fact, the search for man's meaning of existence which religion seeks to answer, despite often probably not coming close, is probably the most significant difference between human animals and non-humans.

You can say it doesn't matter Adept, but you'll mourn when a parent or friend dies and you'll stand up for education and love a great movie or book. Even the elephants mourn. Only the stoics were able to lie to themselves so much as to pretend they didn't matter. And despite the negative consequences of an overly materialistic society we live in now, I'm glad there are no stoics today we seek wisdom from.

To get back on subject, I feel abstinence only is probably not the best way to educate children on sex. There can be a deeper discussion though, besides, you are animals and can not help yourselves. Teenagers do not have sex and think of themselves as just a pawn in an evolutionary cycle.

[ROYC75]

Roy, as always, just contradicted yourself.

Is it a "family issue", i.e. the Palins? Or is it not the Palin's fault?

Whiskey.Tango.Foxtrot.

This isn't a "Liberal Press" issue, it's a NATIONAL ISSUE.

If this woman hadn't just been chosen to the Vice Presidential running mate of John McCain's, nobody and I mean NOBODY would give a flying ****.

Does any of this register with you? Or do you just spew bullshit all day?


Again , you miss the point. It is a family issue that even Obama himself should be left alone. Why do the Obots not follow the advise of their leader ?

You want to make it a National issue because of the election, because of who she is. But Keep it up, that kind of shit will turn the country sour on the dems approach to this.