Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/24
- Regular on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
- okobserver on Open thread 11/24
- okobserver on Open thread 11/24
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/24
Open thread
- By Phillip Brownlee
- Posted April 18, 2007 at 1:06 a.m.
- Filed under Open thread
- Permalink
- Comments RSS
- Both comments and trackbacks are closed
82 Comments
Why is Paul Morrison touring Western Kansas?
http://www.saljournal.com/blogs/?p=1841
Morrison’s remarks in Hays on Friday provoked a new bloghttp://bjbrownsblog.blogspot.com/
The first entry on this new blog by the former Director of Consumer Affairs:
FORMER KLINE OFFICIAL CONGRATULATES ATTORNEY GENERAL PAUL MORRISON
I think the job of Attorney General should be rotated out every two years and by a process of -
Board members from the various counties of the Kansas Bar Association along with -
- a mixed panel of Judges in equal political party distribution as monitors with final approval.
Which brings up another question on the matter of whether Judges should be elected or not.
I watched a PBS documentary about the Iraq war tonight, part of it was about Richard Perle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Perle
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Richard_N._Perle
Known in Washington circles as “The Prince of Darkness,” Perle is associated with the American Enterprise Institute and the Project for the New American Century, both of which have been prominent behind-the-scenes architects of the Bush administration’s foreign policy, in particular its push for war with Iraq
during his part Perle talked about the whys and hows the decision was made to invade Iraq.And his spoke on his being associated with the Neo-Con movement, it was then I had a Joe William moment! There is finally a Register, life long Democrat to blame for the Iraq war disaster!Here is now is the ammunition long looked for and wanted to blame this invasion on the Democrats!
You do know that Richard Perle is a DEMOCRAT! Arrrrrrrr!
Perle is an interesting fellow. I missed the documentary but as I recall he had some run-in back a couple of decades ago concerning secret documents. Lost his job over it, I believe.
Yes, I knew he was a Democrat.
But the PNAC, in and of itself, has no power. It’s a non-partisan group with a mission statement and a ideal for a better world.
But, isn’t every group?
The people we elect are still individuals – and we should look at their entire resume before voting. Inclusion in the PNAC may be a disqualifying factor for some – just as membership in Green Peace is for others.
And therein lies the saving grace of our system.
May we forever protect it.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi:
For example, we have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in our country who need our help along with millions of unemployed minorities. Stock market windfall profits taxes could go a long ways to guarantee these people the standard of living they would like to have as Americans.”
Worst. Speaker. Ever.
I do know yet about how bad a speaker she maybe. But a new tax especially on stocks is bad. Much of our infrastructure is based on investment and driven by the stock market. The income tax already effects any profit that is made from stock investment. Now will there be a exclusion from income tax on profits from stock dividends if there is a windfall profit tax? If not there should be as it would be double taxation upon the same money earned.
FWI I am also against the death tax, inheritance tax, taxes on SS.
G, I just could not resist pointing it out. I was floored when the topic was Fred Phelps and Joe took the chance to bring the dig ” You know Phelps is a Democrat!”.
As for the PNAC, I have been following them for sometime now.In a sense you are right and wrong. Yes in and of themselves the group has little power. I find most of their ideas and believes to be un-American in their concept of what the U.S. should be doing as to foreign policy.But yes their theory has power as some of the main planners are now in the Vice Presidency, former S.OD, world bank and Perle still has the ear of the vice President.
The “ Bush doctrine” is as I call it a crayon copy of the statement of propose of the PNAC.FWI, Perle in the program last night actually said that he too thought Saddam should be ousted but not by invasion. He had voice that it should have been through diplomatic means, but was overruled.
http://www.pbs.org/weta/crossroads/about/show_the_case_for_war.html
in case you want to see it.
Seems as good a time as any to call for the de-funding of PBS and NPR. They are strong enough to stand on their own.
“Seems as good a time as any to call for the de-funding of PBS”
excellant point comrade fleetwood we come use the money to fund re-education camps
“…use the money to fund re-education camps”
That doesn’t even make sense.
“That doesn’t even make sense.”
You must not be wearing your rush hannity secret decoder ring
“Seems as good a time as any to call for the de-funding of PBS and NPR. They are strong enough to stand on their own.”
So far, so good. I’ll be hanging another plaque soon. All you people have to offer is… nothing.
On a happier note —- After a rather mediocre underwhelming experience at a Stage One Event early last year (Mama Mia was Great this , but I think they were sponsored by a different organization) I never thought I’d be promoting their shows — but Bob Curtwright in todays Wichitalk reviews “Crowns” beginning with:
“Playwright Regina Taylor’s “Crowns” is a rich, righteous and revelatory look at the traditions of black women and their big Sunday go-to-church hats, and Stage One’s version is irresistible.”
It features several Wichita artists (read the article)one of international reknown.
I could see where it might help bridge / appease some cultural divides and prejudices and maybe clear up some preconceived notions about the differences between races. If not it still sounds like fun family entertainment. I suspect some of the characters will remind us of our own mothers / sisters etc …..
take a look — buy a ticket –
http://kansas.com/160/story/47090.html
to ward off any cynics, failed narcissists etc ….. I have no dog in this fight — I don’t work for Stage One or it’s vendors, Century II and any parking lot or restaurant cab or bus company or religious organization, I am not supported by any political party, or the NAACP — did I miss any one? —-and have absolutely no political agenda in promoting this …..
I hear very often people complain “There’s nothing to do in Wichita” — guess again …
PBS has a lot to offer educationally, but NPR???
House Bill 2062, the Unborn Victims of Violence Act (UVVA, Alexa’s Law), is coming up for a final vote very soon. This is a piece of anti-woman legislation will even effect women who want to have their babies.HB 2062 will have unintended consequences for pregnant women. In South Carolina, a similar law has been used only three times against an actual perpetrator since its inception in 1984. It has been used over 70 times, however, to prosecute women who were carrying their babies to term. A similar trend has appeared in other states as well, even though the laws specifically exempt pregnant women just as HB 2062 does.
HB 2062 does nothing to address violence against pregnant women, but functionssolely by defining fetuses as people under the Kansas criminal code. Homicide is the number one cause of death amongst pregnant women. Until violence against women is addressed; pregnant women will continue to be murdered.
HB 2062 is controversial because, for the first time ever, it would define fetuses,
from the moment of conception, as full people under Kansas law.
From an Email I received today.
I want to add, that UVVA has been debated in the House and Senate for years, introduced by the same anti-abortion people with the same kind of language. If this won’t affect abortion rights, why is Operation Rescue and Kansans for Life pushing so hard to get this passed?
Think about it.
How can you say the PNAC yeilds no power when some of the most powerful and influential people are part of it?
Would you think differently if they were all part of Al Qaida?
“PBS has a lot to offer educationally, but NPR???”
A few years ago, PBS had an ad campaign that said something like,”If not here, where?”The ad was pulled fairly quickly because the answer was painfully obvious.
PM
For others to peruse Here’s a link to HB 2062:
http://skyways.lib.ks.us/ksleg/KLRD/2007ConfCommRpts/Ccrb2062_002_75.pdf
…. except in some very rare cases, particularly where the father is and wants to be intimatley involved in the raising and rearing the child and is willing to vouch to that and show adequate means of support and determination, I do believe that a woman is free to choose – and answer for her actions not to an earthly court or public opinion, but to thier God ..
The bill seems to exclude actions of the mother, and seems an attempt to bring to justice perpetrators of the listed crimes — PM How would you word the bill to insure / guarantee the mother would not be prosecuted?
Is ethanol the answer to go green and reduce our dependence on foreign oil?
The US produce somewhere around 82 billion bushels of corn last year. If we used ever last kernel of corn to produce ethanol, it was be around 14% of our fuel needs.
On top of the water needed for each ethanol plant. At small and typical 60 million gallon ethanol plant will consume 640,000 gallons of water a day. And these are the plants popping up in Western Kansas.
Also ethanol isn’t as efficient as gasoline in fuel economy standards. Depending on vehicle, ethanol is about 3/5 effective as gasoline. Meaning that you would have to reduce your MPG rating by 2/5 to get your accurate MPG rating on your car.
I’m not going to touch on the farm and government subsidies of it. That’s another big problem with the industry.
Planned parenthood introduced a bill that would have allowed harsher punishment for any crime against a pregnant woman. That would have helped women who are battered when pregnant (which is when a woman is most at risk to be battered). And it would have served the same purpose as this law- to double the time of someone convicted of killing a pregnant woman. And it would have been done without jeopardizing the rights of women and assigning personhood to the fetus.
That is what the antiwomen people want, because once that’s in they’re going to turn around and say that since a fetus is a person, that killing it is murder.
If you don’t believe me look it up from the ones wanting this passed.
Joe,I have to agree. Ethanol does not even drastically reduce emissions – E85 anyway. Electric cars are really coming into their own. The Tesla Roadster will do 0 to 60 in less than 4 seconds with a 250 mile range. I haven’t looked too much into H2, but ethanol looks like a strawman that will do more harm than good.
P_Mom,It sounds like you have a double standard and enjoy labeling. Antiwoman? Would that, by your post, make you antibaby?Name calling aside; you shouldn’t have it both ways. You want woman protected because they are pregnant – have another human inside them. But at the same time, you want woman to be free to extinguish the life that is inside them.Sounds like a double standard. If I’m wrong in how I perceive your statement, please correct me.
“”Playwright Regina Taylor’s “Crowns” is a rich, righteous and revelatory look at the traditions of black women and their big Sunday go-to-church hats, and Stage One’s version is irresistible.”
It features several Wichita artists (read the article)one of international reknown.”
Karla Burns is absolutey THE BEST, and anyone who has the opportunity to go see this show should GO!
***women
“…. except in some very rare cases, particularly where the father is and wants to be intimatley involved in the raising and rearing the child”
Is he going to take over carrying the child too? Because until he can, it is still her body and her decision, her risk. You’re opening a whole nother can of worms here. If the baby has a horrible disease, and the father wants the baby, but the mother doesn’t want her child to suffer like that, who will the court rule for? You know there are a whole mess of pro-life judges who won’t care the circumstances.
If the father is just trying to get back at the mother to come back to him by holding this child over her head?
Because that scenario right there is what is happening in all these adoption cases where the mother can’t afford the baby but loves it, and then the father who is a POS comes in and says he wants the baby so she can’t allow it to be adopted into a good home. Her choice is to keep a baby she can’t deal with or let it go to someone who she knows will treat it worse. And then that father will always have ties to the woman.
You’re wrong, I always side on the woman, her rights to her own body and her own decisions. Her right to keep a baby is just as valid as her right to abort.
“Planned parenthood introduced a bill that would have allowed harsher punishment for any crime against a pregnant woman. ”
I have always wondered how Planned Parenthood can be so politically active and still keep their tax exempt status. Didn’t Operation Rescue lose theirs for the very same reason? Rightly so I might add.
If a woman wants to cut her own body into pieces and bleed to death, so be it. At some point, an abortion is perfomed not on thewoman;s body, but on another human beings.
PM
I’m on your side on this with one exception —- I don’t think it’s anti woman, or these same people might be writing legislation to keep women out of the work place, who they can and can’t marry etc … basically relegating them to slavery status …. hopefully / luckily there are women legislators who won’t let that happen.
It’s more about faith, morality, education and perhaps an attempt to go back to the good old days when women were treated as second class citizens and men ruled the world —
And to the fathers, P_Mom, they have no say in what happens to their child? There are just as many POS mothers as there are fathers.
To say that because the child grows inside the woman that it is wholly her decision is absolutely wrong. There are three people, PEOPLE, involved in EVERY pregnancy.
More women die giving birth than having an abortion, so whatever littlejohn. And homicide is the number one killer of pregnant women.
Except one :->
Political mom! I’m with you, but I do have a question to ask.
If a woman decides to keep a baby, but the man doesn’t want it, why is the man still obligated to pay child support?
If a woman decides to abort the fetus, does that mean the man has to be stuck with the abortion bill or at least half the cost?
P_Mom,More children die in abortions than being born.
PM-\Sorry, I am not tracking. I am sure you are correct about that statistic. I am not sure of the relevancy.
By the way, homicide is already agaisnt the law
The only thing that matters is that mother at that point Sol. It’s her body that is altered, if she dies, the baby dies too.Her life always comes first or that baby doesn’t have one either. No man or judge should dictate what happens to my body. Ever.
P_Mom,I guess it comes down to this, you expect special treatment for pregnant women; a woman that holds another human life inside her. The life that is inside her, as you have shown, is of no consequence. To be removed at the woman’s pleasure.
Pure double standard.
Joe the courts have it worked that way, but let me tell you from firsthand experience, if that man wants out of paying child support, he can do it.
Let me tell you a story of how my daughter’s father did it. He was shot, stabbed, on drugs, and he told me if I went after child support he’d make sure he got plenty of visitation. This man was a complete POS, and it frightened me to have him around her. So I agreed to never persue child support. My sister did the same thing. And lo and behold those fabulous dads just disappeared. And my daughter’s biological father was convicted for raping his other 8 year old daughter years later.
I will never be sorry for giving up that child support. But we’re also the ones who suffered without it. And if I had gone to the state for food stamps, they’d have gone after him, which would have made him come after me.
There was nothing before his rape that would have prevented the court from giving him visitation. It happens all the time, battered women, drug/alcohol addicted men getting custody. I have a good friend whose POS abusive ex right now has custody of her son and she pays child support. WHY? She only reported the abuse once, but there was no evidence that he did it all the other times.
Sorry you, your sister and your friend got mixed in with some bad guys.
Unfortunately that happens way to often and that is why I support a woman’s right to choose.
And going down that same road P_Mom, the crack head mothers that spend the child support on drugs. Leaving their kids in the car or on the couch while they are strung out.
Men don’t have a corner on the market for being idiots and bad parents. THAT at least is equal opportunity.
I have to add that I am truly sorry for what you and your kid(s) had to go thru. No one should have to deal with that crap. Man, woman or child.
P_Mom,Hindsight… but if you got a restraining order on him, wouldn’t that have ended his parenting time?
My posts sound like I hate men and that I think they’re all scum. I absolutely do not feel that way, I just think there are a lot of scum out there. There are some hella great dads out there too. I know, I’m married to one now.
And yes, some mothers fall into the same category.
I wish family law was better designed. I wish judges were taken more seriously when people go to the polls. NOW used to have a courtwatch program that went to court with battered women and reported to the community when those women were treated badly by judges. I’d really like to see that begin again. Because it’s happening all over Kansas and these POS dads are winning.
It’s just not fair. I also think if a man or woman has a battery charge, or even if there is just the accusation, the entire incident and history need to be taken into careful consideration.
Sol, nope. Just because you are a pos doesn’t mean you can’t be a good parent (apparently), and just because they beat the wife, doesn’t mean they’ll beat the kids. The judges put in mediators where the mom can drop off the kids without seeing the father.
Just mental beating, usually. It is usually the batterers that are so good at manipulating and controlling and psychological warfare.
And I”m still bent all out of shape over that story in Wichita last year, where the mother dropped the infant off at the baby’s father’s house, and he said he wouldnt’ take it. So SHE was arrested for abandonment.
Why wasn’t HE?
Pipe dream… The gov’t could turn on and off fertility. You have to be able to prove that you are/will be a good parent before you are allowed to breed. Screw it up and you get turned off again.
There is bias for both sides PM. When I have a problem and have to go to the ‘Friend of the Court’, since I don’t have breasts, I get crap.
Point in case, I had a court order to appear before a referee to explain why I didn’t provide my W2’s. I explained that this was the first time I was asked to produce them. They told me they mailed (3rd class non-certified) me a request. When I told them I didn’t receive it, they told me to – wait for it – PROVE that I didn’t receive it.
It goes both ways P_Mom. You have seen some rough roads on your side, and I have seen some (not as) rough (as yours) roads as well. The system DOES need some revampment.
This is why I support a woman’s right to choose though. Almost always, the burden falls upon her. And if she’s not cut out for it, too young, too broke, too mentally ill, whatever…
I wish there was a way to make it fair to the good dads out there. Because it’s not fair to them either.
So far, the best thing I’ve seen come from the courts is joint custody for all the good parents. But that takes two who are willing to put their kids first.
Sol, that does suck. How exactly do you prove you didn’t receive it?
Blows my mind.
“BAGHDAD, April 18 — A string of bombings killed at least 127 people across Baghdad Wednesday, police said, as bloodshed spiked two months into a U.S.-led crackdown meant to placate the Iraqi capital.”http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/18/AR2007041800799.html?hpid=topnews
The surge is working!!!!!
Don’t remember that case Political Mom. Perhaps one of the legal beagle will weight on it.
My take on it, is that the care of a child is upon the provider (parent or otherwise) who was charged by law to care for it.
Dropping an infant off somewhere doesn’t relieve the provider of that responsibility.
But I agree that the father should have been charged with something. I don’t know the circumstances of the case. Did he report the abandoned child? If he didn’t then I say charge him as well.
It doesn’t matter- he should have had equal responsibility for that child right? He was the parent, so was she. He is the one who reported the child abandoned by the way.
Why are you so gleeful about reporting death xxx?
Your writing shows you tend to care more about zinging a policy than concerned with the death of others brought about by people in Iraq who have deliberating chosen a path of evil.
As we have seen in the VT case, protection of people is not always possible if a killer is determined to kill.
I don’t recall the circumstances of the case P_Mom brought up, but in general, the parent with legal custody could be charged with abandonment under the circumstances described, while the noncustodial parent (although having his (in this case) own legal responsibilities) could not have “abandoned” the child as he had no right to custody. Very broad, general and sweeping statements from one who does not practice Family Law.
Republican, that’s 127 people who won’t be shooting at us.
P_Mom has signed off, so this is not to sharp-shoot her while she is gone but to keep the discussion going for everyone that is interested…
As far as the case she pointed out, does anyone know the specifics? If ‘mom’ dropped the child off at ‘dad’s’ while no one was home, then she is at fault.
If ‘dad’ was home, then he is an asshole and doesn’t need to see his kids anymore.
What strikes me is this; let’s say ‘dad’ was home and was being an asshole, think about the impact that had on his child. ‘Dad’ doesn’t want me to be with him…
Xxx,Those that dies were most likely not ones who would be shooting at us, or blowing things up.
Sol, I guess we’ll never know.
Now I don’t think Iraqi’s are the brightest bulbs on the strand, but give them some credit. If you were over there fighting and were to detonate a bomb to kill a bunch of folks, would you blow up the people that supported you?
Here we go, how can the Iraqi’s be this dumb. If they stop killing us and each other, we will go HOME !!!!! The more death and mayhem there is over there the more Bush feels like he needs to be there.
I think it is the Iraqis that don’t want us to leave. They are just BEGGING us to stay by the way they are acting.
‘I think it is the Iraqis that don’t want us to leave’
An important flaw in your reasoning is that there is no ‘The Iraqis’. There are two/three major parties in Iraq, each of which has a different agenda and different thoughts about foreign forces being there.
xxx used the first line of the article — he didn’t sound gleeful — certainly critical not gleeful ….
an exerpt from the article:”Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, on a tour of the Mideast, called the bombings “horrifying” and accused al-Qaeda of being behind the attacks, the AP reported. He said the attackers were trying to demonstrate that the U.S. security plan for Baghdad was failing.
“These terrorists are killing innocent men, women and children who are Iraqis. They’re killing their countrymen,” Gates said at a news conference in Tel Aviv.
Why is the death of those 170 Iraqi’s less important then the 32 people killed at VT, our soldiers etc …… I would think your argument would be be “…. they are killing innocent people, and only we have the capability to stem the violence ….” not some cheap shot at his motivation ….
It’s an open thread –
“Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, on a tour of the Mideast, called the bombings “horrifying” and accused al-Qaeda of being behind the attacks, the AP reported. He said the attackers were trying to demonstrate that the U.S. security plan for Baghdad was failing.
“These terrorists are killing innocent men, women and children who are Iraqis. They’re killing their countrymen,” Gates said at a news conference in Tel Aviv.
and if I get the names of those 170 I’ll post em here …………
RIP
The sheer, unmitigated gall of House conservative Republicans in Topeka never ceases to amaze.This afternoon, House Republicans finally produced their deferred maintenance plan… such as it is.The operative phrase here, folks, is that the arena tax would be made permanent, and used to fund maintenance at WSU. Other counties with Regents’ institutions would have the same tax imposed upon them.And you have anti-tax, anti-education Sedgwick County Republicans Dick Kelsey, Ty Masterson, Joe McLeland and Jason Watkins to thank for that.If you don’t believe me, I’ll be happy to forward the announcement from Melvin Neufeld’s office.
mrc, would you not agree that if enacted, this would severely limit Mr. Norton’s plans?
I feel sorry for dad’s with no rights in all this baby mess, and these things really should be addressed early on.
Sadly, if a woman chooses to abort – for whatever reason, the father is going to be out of the picture. The gal has that choice, and we need to protect that, however we ALSO need to give a biological the right to “abort out” of fatherhood at that point, also, if he so chooses. You would think in this day and age, girls would no longer try to get pregnant only to ‘trap’ a boy. Jeez, that’s so 1945, after all….but, it happens.
A male should ALSO have the option NOT to be the daddy – IF he comes forth within…say…two months of being informed of his impending father-hood and file papers with the court stating that he does NOT want any link to the child.
It is the woman’s duty to inform the biological father as soon as she knows she is pregnant. Since we’re giving her the right to ‘opt-out’ for a period of time – the male deserves that right also.
But, should he be informed and NOT opt-out within the specified time, the mother should be able to collect child support. Just as a woman must decide within a specified time – so should a man.
But the biggest cure of all – is to help our young people realize that unprotected sex is a ticking time bomb that is going to blow up in their faces.
When kids don’t find acceptance, love and security at home – they look elsewhere for it. Make them feel important, respected, loved. Then, hopefully, they will love themselves enough to set goals for their lives and make intelligent choices.
GS – Let me start by saying I am pro-choice. And at first glance I like your idea about a man having the same opportunity to opt out that a woman has. But do you think this would increase abortions? Would these girls (and I say girls because they hopefully wouldn’t be mature women) decide to have an abortion if they find out that the “daddy” doesn’t want the baby, and they will be alone in raising it? I’m not sure it would, but it brings up interesting consequences for men to have that option.
TDT – good point. Hopefully, we could make the girls realize ahead of time that they can’t “force” daddy-hood, and circumvent a tricked pregnancy.
So few of these girls are ready for an intimate relationship, much less a baby. The young men usually aren’t ready either.
I really believe we have to address the self-esteem issues BEFORE the pregnancy.
But, the males DO deserve a choice if the females get one. It’s only fair.
GS – I agree we need to address the self esteem issues. Sheepishly I admit that when I wasn’t working, I watched Maury, and there were YOUNG girls, 12 or 13 year olds, that were TRYING to get pregnant. It totally blew my mind.
Vaughn–concur.
I have this idea for performing a reversible sterilization on all babies. After they are 18 and if they can pass an appropriate test of intelligence, morality, and self-sufficiency, the sterilization would be reversed and they could have kids.I am still working out the logistics of this idea but it seems like it would fix many problems.
Fathers have no say and should have no say in abortion because it is the mother that has to have the kid and, in most cases, raise the kid with little or no help from the BUM who doesn’t want her to abort. Abortion is SOLEY the decision of the woman and her doctor and everybody else should stay the hell out and mind their own damn business including the government for the first 3 months or so of a pregnancy.
“I have this idea for performing a reversible sterilization on all babies. After they are 18 and if they can pass an appropriate test of intelligence, morality, and self-sufficiency, the sterilization would be reversed and they could have kids.I am still working out the logistics of this idea but it seems like it would fix many problems.”
If it could be done safely, I would be 100% in favour of such a procedure.
Wow this sounds like China. Forcing babies to be sterilized?
Passing an intelligence test?
How about education?
Brian and Kev have a point. Although the ’sterilization’ sounds bad, at first – I have long advocated hormonal birth control injections to be given to every individual just before they are handed a welfare check.
If there is EVER a time one should not get pregnant, it is when they are living on taxpayer money.
We could implement a VOLUNTARY tax incentive program – OR scholarship program for kids (or young adults) who would be willing to take the injections, also.
Later – when they decide the time is right they can have their children.
The idea Brian puts forth isn’t a bad one at all….it just needs a little tweaking.
But he’s on the right track.
The supreme court just ruled against some abortion procedures. The battle continues.
On “America at a Crossroads”, they were showing services at Mosques with only males listening to sermons and praying together. Women are forced to wear hair covering–in America. Let’s see, I’ve seen many church and synogogue services in America. It’s time for Muslims to either decide to live in the 21st centuryin America, or the 12th century in Muslim countries. America isn’t a medieval, or pre-medieval nation.
If men want to segregate and confine women, there are better places. Like Syria and Iran. How many Christian churches and Jewish temples do we know that don’t allow entire families to sit together to worship?
It is fine to come to America to experience freedom. That means freedom for people of both sexes.
“Wow this sounds like China. Forcing babies to be sterilized?
Passing an intelligence test?
How about education?”
China did what it had to do to aviod famine and survive. China was vastly overpopulated. Many families were having 6 or more kids and the population was close to the point where the land simply could not support it anymore. Even today with the 1 child policy China still has to build what amounts to Houston every month just to keep up. And yes, dumb people should have babies either because they are too dumb to care for and raise a kid. But I would not sterilize them. But I would not have any problem with a “sterilization until age 18″ policy if it could be done safely and the reverse 100% effective.
BTW I have made it clear to my daughter that if she feels the need for birth control I will be happy to see that she gets it. If she needs the “morning after” pill, I will get that too. And if she shows up pregnant I will drag her to the clinic to terminate in chains if I have to. In other words, YOU AIN’T HAVIN NO BABIES until you are 18 or out of college!
“The supreme court just ruled against some abortion procedures. The battle continues.”
The Supreme Court did not outlaw anything. All they said was the states themselves can outlaw certain procedures that terminate late term fetuses. And I agree with that. People should not be getting abortions at 9 months where the doctor has to deliver the fetus live and then kill it. But it is still up to the states to outlaw it so Dr Tiller is probably safe for now.
You won’t get her an abortion if she doesn’t want one. I can promise you that they don’t do them just because the parents want it.
and you’re also against late term abortions, so she could hide it till past the date.
Adoption in her case would be the better answer. But how sad that you’ve made her feel that she will have nowhere to turn if she DOES end up pregnant.
“I have this idea for performing a reversible sterilization on all babies. After they are 18 and if they can pass an appropriate test of intelligence, morality, and self-sufficiency, the sterilization would be reversed and they could have kids.I am still working out the logistics of this idea but it seems like it would fix many problems.”
Sounds great if you’re a 21st century Nazi. WTF, are you thinking? The fact that GS is agreeing with you, establishes this idea as totally fascist!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
Mr. Brian, time to think, as opposed, to reacting…
“A male should ALSO have the option NOT to be the daddy”
He does, it’s called keeping it in your pants. Amazing how well such a simple plan can work…