Abigail

How about post Roe v Wade? I don't have a ton of time to put into this, Mark, but I will do what I can. Here are a few links to stories of women who were denied medically necessary abortions POST Roe V Wade, though the issues here have to do with Medicaide Funding. here here here I will do more looking but you are talking about hundreds of thousands of websites

Gee Belle, looks like you struck a nerve with someone, eh? Looks like your being sent to the time-out corner now.

ah but did Paul commit murder before or AFTER he met Jesus and received salvation? in comparison/contrast Did VPW commit rape before or AFTER he was given his "ministry"?

bookworm, I am. I love anything King Arthur, though my favorite is Mists of Avalon. I am also a great fan of Heinlein (in fact, that reminds me I need to get Sushi started on his books). I also love fiction that is based on historical fact. Likewise, fiction based on cultural fact. I used to love Anne Rice, but got bored with her and stopped reading her books, then Sushi got me a book she wrote on the childhood of Jesus that was fantastic! I also enjoyed the Narnia books and hope someday to get the boys to read them with me. Terry Brooks and Pierce Anthony are great fantasty writers. Tom Bodett spins a great tale that will make you laugh (and he'll leave the light on for ya). I highly recommend "The End of the Road".

To clarify something . . . Mark, I never answered your question because I simply do not know the answer. It was never my intention to imply medically necessary abortions had been denied in the past. I was simply stating my opinion that medically necessary abortions should not be denied.

Sudo, Back in my days, which ended about 5 years ago, shortly after the LCM scandal people started leaving in droves. I sat at fellowship one night and one of my friends prayed for some other friends who had recently departed TWI. She was publicly reemed for praying for "cop-outs", cussing, swearing, the whole works. It got very ugly and my friend never went back to fellowhip after that night. I cried when she left. She was the lsecond to ast friend I still had on the inside, and I knew what was coming. She was also the only person I knew, outside my family, that I trusted to babysit my little boys. My sister was unmarried and pregnant at the time and I was to be her coach. I couldn't leave my own baby's at home with my (now ex) as he was clueless as to how to take care of them (women's work). The original plan was that my friend would watch the kids while I was with my sister, but once she left TWI, I was forbidden from seeing her. I cannot tell you how much it ripped me apart to lose her, but I was faced with losing her friendship or losing my marriage (I didn't really care about losing TWI at that point beyond trying to keep my marriage intact). When I left TWI, which was the following fall, only one person stayed in touch with me. She too left shortly after I did. I have run into "innies" from time to time at school events for my kids. The ONLY reason they spoke to me was because I approached them first, and their discomfort was obvious. A week ago I ran into a girl I knew from TWI who is still in. The last time I had seen her was after I left TWI, in a college class we somehow ended up in together. She dropped the class and from what my ex said, went into quite the rant about how discusted she was with me for being so happy given my departure from TWI and subsequent divorce. So anyway, last week I ran into her again for the first time in quite a few years. She gave me the spiel about the kinder gentler ministry (I felt like I was being witnessed to). But I figure, you wanna be my friend, then be my friend regardless of whether or not I ever attend fellowship. Wanna bet on whether or not she gives me a call to go hang out, unless of course it is at a fellowship meeting?

Well if your courts are anything like ours, the teacher will be free to hurt more children very soon. Check out the cut and paste below from our newspaper. Note this guy is a HABITUAL offender with his 3rd conviction and could be free to act again in less than 3 years! "Mark Steven Morris, 51, of Charlotte, accosting a child for an immoral purpose by a sexually delinquent person, habitual offender, third conviction, 34 to 96 months in prison, 162 days credit, mental health treatment, sex offender programs, attend counseling, restitution, $60 state cost, $60 to Crime Victims Rights Fund."

"what the book says is true; she doesn't want me to spit out a solution, she wants me to reaffirm that she's OK and everything's gonna be fine. I don't know what mine is yet." That's one of those somewhat typical male/female things. Men want to fix it and women want empathy.

"This shows the value of some of the old fashioned/ old world customs: in this case, not leaving a man and a woman alone unchaperoned. " While I agree there is some logic to this in certain situations, I think overall it would be much better if people simply respected each other enough that such customs were not needed. Call me an idealist, I know. "Of course, some on GS would contend that the "no" may not be given in some cases because of threats, implied or otherwise...that is, fear of reprisal." And I would agree that such circumstances do occur. But then you run into how do you hold a man accountable for not reading a woman's mind. Of course if the man or, for that matter woman, who is the aggressor is in a position of authority or power over the other person, there are still ethical considerations.

"Why was she in the fraternity house? Did she report it to anyone at the time? Was it a case of "date rape"?" None of that ultimately matters. Rape is rape, whether you know the perp or not. In fact, in some ways I would think "date rape" would be worse in that you body and your trust in someone you know have both been violated. That being said, short of the man pleading guilty, it seems to me they are going to have a hell of a time getting a conviction. If he does plead guilty? I don't know, I have mixed feelings on this one.

yeah - apparently even dogs have more sense then we did :blink:

(((()))))) Thank you everyone. :)

(((Sudo)))) (((DMiller))) (((Medic)))) thank you.

I have refrained from posting on this thread for a myriad of reasons, but my self-restraint has broken. For anyone to comment on what went wrong with George's marriage, who knew what, who did what, is just the height of arrogancy. No one knows what went wrong and most likely it was many things. Many of us share personal/intimate details from our lives here because we feel we are among friends. Unfortunately, at times that opens the door for comments we don't want to hear or that are just plain out of line. George is mourning a tremendous loss and the last thing a grieving person needs to hear is that they are responsible for the loss (whether or not it may be true). Those kind of comments are better saved for after the mourning is over. For a time when someone is ready for an introspective look, and even then they should be held in check unless asked for. Most people who are grieving simply need an ear to listen and a shoulder to cry on. ((((George)))) I am terribly sorry for your loss and the pain you are suffering because of it. As for the topic of the thread itself. NO ONE goes into a marriage hoping it will end in divorce. Anyone who has gone through a divorce understands that it is a death. A loss not only of love per se (which many not even be lost at all) but a loss of a friendship, dreams, hope, your present life as you know it, the future life you had planned. NO ONE should judge and accuse someone for a marriage that didn't work out, because they weren't there and they don't know what happened. Rather, we should comfort them for their loss as we would comfort one if a loved one died - because that is exactly what it feels like.

Belle, it isn't about being articulate, it's about "fuzzy logic". You can't argue with an innie because their "logic" isn't logical, but due they don't see their cognative dissodence - it's called denial.

Once again, Sudo, I have to take issue with your black and white thinking and labelling. I would fit the description of a so-called "liberal" but I do NOT agree with this judge and I am NOT opposed to punshment. Likewise I do not believe rehabilitation is possible for men like these and therefore the only solution is the death penalty.

That is about the most ridiculous thing I have heard of yet. As if the hymen means so much! Does it somehow magically erase the past experience(s)? the memories? The emotional residue left behind? Give me a friggen break! Our country truly has gone mad.

Sad and sick and it happens every day here in the U.S. I was just reading the Courts section this past weekend and read about someone convicted of 3RD offense domestic violence - got less than a month. Somone else convicted of 2nd degree sexual assault on a minor, got about 60 days. But God forbid you get busted with a joint, for that you will get years!

Not a skit, a movie - The Meaning of Life I LOVE Monty Python!!!!!!!!! Oh and let us not forget "It's wafer thin"

okay, I have to add my two cents here. I think the politicians who get the most press are often the nuts, be they dems or republicans. But I am idealistic or niave enough to think your average citizen is more rational and somewhere in the middle. I would, by many standards, be considered a liberal, and yet there have been a number of issues where I've leaned more toward the republican view. In fact, I'm guessing if I were to post my opinions on a sight that were truly liberal in the fanatical sense, they would see me as conservative. In fact, I would vote again for our republican Attorney General over the democratic candidate (Feigher - gag gag gag) any day of the week. That is why I dislike the labels so much. It paints people into a corner - leaves you with a false impression of who they really are. Robertson is a nut, and I can't help but wonder how you would feel, Sudo (I'm pickin on you for an example) if you were painted with his brush simply based on what people know of him as a conservative, instead of what people know about you as a conservative. I agree with Danny. I vote for the candidate, not the party. Though lately, it seems there aren't many candidates that are worth the trip out to the voting booth from either side.

Amen, Oakspear!

A serious and educated Catholic believes that he cannot understand the stop sign apart from its interpretive community and their tradition. Observing that the interpretive community doesn't take it too seriously, he doesn't feel obligated to take it too seriously either. An average Catholic (or Orthodox or Coptic or Anglican or Methodist or Presbyterian or whatever) doesn't bother to read the sign but he'll stop if the car in front of him does. A fundamentalist, taking the text very literally, stops at the stop sign and waits for it to tell him to go. A preacher (or Wayfer) might look up "STOP" in his lexicons of English and discover that it can mean: 1) something which prevents motion, such as a plug for a drain, or a block of wood that prevents a door from closing; 2) a location where a train or bus lets off passengers. The main point of his sermon the following Sunday on this text is: when you see a stop sign, it is a place where traffic is naturally clogged, so it is a good place to let off passengers from your car. An orthodox Jew does one of two things: Take another route to work that doesn't have a stop sign so that he doesn't run the risk of disobeying the Law. Stop at the stop sign, say "Blessed art thou, O Lord our G-d, king of the universe, who hast given us thy commandment to stop," wait 3 seconds according to his watch, and then proceed. A practioner of Zen sees the sign and comes gently to a stop. Conemplating the beauty of the world, he resolves to spend even more time enjoying nature and then proceeds at peace with the world.

I like the flashchat best - except: 1) It needs to only have one background option so we are all seeing the same thing - otherwise it can be hard to read what people write and 2) the background should not be a busy one, because that also makes it hard to see what is written.

Nato, My recollection is that the ATF had offices there. They were under investigation for Ruby Ridge and all the records were conveniently destroyed in the explosion.

"The only person looking this topless woman in the face is the other woman ......." Isn't that often the case, regardless of whether or not the woman is fully clothed?