Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Re: raising dogs & pro-life
Laura M
>And speaking of "reproductive rights they want to control", doesOH, BUT YOU DO!!!!!!!!!!! You most certainly do go around shoving your
>anybody realize that if you are pro-life, pro-natural family
>planning, pro-God's will & the faith to do His will, that you are
>under constant attack by "pro-choicers"? From family, to doctors, to
>other "faithful" people, to strangers or obviously others on this
>unschooling list, we never hear the end of it. That strikes me as
>ironic since we don't go around shoving our beliefs down other
>people's throats and we don't try to "convince" others to follow our
>beliefs. We do live out a testimony to our beliefs and find it
>absolutely amazing that so many people are offended by our "pro-life"
>attitude and have the nerve to try to shove their opinions down our
>throats.
>
beliefs down other people's throats!!!! Between the bumper stickers,
religious pamphlets and abortion clinic protests...how can you say that you
don't shove your beliefs down our throats? Are these all examples of your
"testimony to our beliefs"? Since it is a testimony to your belief does it
make it any less offensive to others who have different beliefs? Do you
think that you have some "God Given" right to shove your beliefs down our
throats, while we have no rights since we don't all prescribe to the rules
of your god. This seems totally unfair and hypocrital of you.
Laura
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
[email protected]
In a message dated 01/30/01 6:17:30 PM, lauramatec@... writes:
<< Do you
think that you have some "God Given" right to shove your beliefs down our
throats >>
Not right. Duty.
I've been a fundamentalist Christian, and I honestly understand their drive
to proselytize and to help prevent sin.
Christianity in its fundamental forms (devout Catholicism; Southern Baptists
and their ilk) do not see "their beliefs" and "other's beliefs." They see
TRUTH and Satanic evil. There is some benevolent ignorance, and those people
might yet come to be saved.
And naturally, the Catholics and the Baptists see one another as part of the
Satanic evil.
So I understand it in Christian terms, but I don't like to keep on seeing it
in homeschooling discussions. There are hundreds of thousands of families
who homeschool because they believe God told them to--because they want their
children to associate only with likeminded Christians (that's what statement
of faith groups are all about), and they're raising the next generation of
American leadership, leaders who won't be confused by all kinds of
politically correct, critical-thinking nonsense, but will be Steeped in the
TRUTH of God.
Those homeschoolers sometimes cannot fathom why others would homeschool.
We're not all doing the same thing. Sometimes unschooling families who want
their children to be independent thinkers are more anethema to strictly
controlling families than general schoolgoing families are.
-=-...while we have no rights since we don't all prescribe to the rules
of your god. This seems totally unfair and hypocrital of you.-=-
No, from their point of view to adopt a "to each his own" attitude would be
to condemn non-believers to hell. They NEED to try to convert others. Jesus
commanded it. They're not trying to be obnoxious, they're trying to show us
the one true way to live forever in joy. I'm serious.
I was also serious when I expressed amusement that in the very same week
birth control clinics are condemned but dog breeding is condemned too. NO
more dogs; LOTS more people. But it wasn't logic, it was religion, and I
forgot that for a second.
Sandra
one of over six billion cousins of monkeys
<< Do you
think that you have some "God Given" right to shove your beliefs down our
throats >>
Not right. Duty.
I've been a fundamentalist Christian, and I honestly understand their drive
to proselytize and to help prevent sin.
Christianity in its fundamental forms (devout Catholicism; Southern Baptists
and their ilk) do not see "their beliefs" and "other's beliefs." They see
TRUTH and Satanic evil. There is some benevolent ignorance, and those people
might yet come to be saved.
And naturally, the Catholics and the Baptists see one another as part of the
Satanic evil.
So I understand it in Christian terms, but I don't like to keep on seeing it
in homeschooling discussions. There are hundreds of thousands of families
who homeschool because they believe God told them to--because they want their
children to associate only with likeminded Christians (that's what statement
of faith groups are all about), and they're raising the next generation of
American leadership, leaders who won't be confused by all kinds of
politically correct, critical-thinking nonsense, but will be Steeped in the
TRUTH of God.
Those homeschoolers sometimes cannot fathom why others would homeschool.
We're not all doing the same thing. Sometimes unschooling families who want
their children to be independent thinkers are more anethema to strictly
controlling families than general schoolgoing families are.
-=-...while we have no rights since we don't all prescribe to the rules
of your god. This seems totally unfair and hypocrital of you.-=-
No, from their point of view to adopt a "to each his own" attitude would be
to condemn non-believers to hell. They NEED to try to convert others. Jesus
commanded it. They're not trying to be obnoxious, they're trying to show us
the one true way to live forever in joy. I'm serious.
I was also serious when I expressed amusement that in the very same week
birth control clinics are condemned but dog breeding is condemned too. NO
more dogs; LOTS more people. But it wasn't logic, it was religion, and I
forgot that for a second.
Sandra
one of over six billion cousins of monkeys
[email protected]
In a message dated 1/30/01 5:17:26 PM Pacific Standard Time,
lauramatec@... writes:
<< OH, BUT YOU DO!!!!!!!!!!! >>
Do you know this woman personally?
candice
lauramatec@... writes:
<< OH, BUT YOU DO!!!!!!!!!!! >>
Do you know this woman personally?
candice
Kerry Kibort
So I understand it in Christian terms, but I don't
like to keep on seeing it
in homeschooling discussions.
Wait! What about the eduaction we are getting out of
this intellegent discussion on abortion and dog
breeding?<gggg>
Sorry, I couldnt resist. First Jesus, now this.
Kerry, your cousin and possibly also a monkey
like to keep on seeing it
in homeschooling discussions.
Wait! What about the eduaction we are getting out of
this intellegent discussion on abortion and dog
breeding?<gggg>
Sorry, I couldnt resist. First Jesus, now this.
Kerry, your cousin and possibly also a monkey
Laura M
Candice,
This is a direct quote from her post...
That strikes me as
ironic since we don't go around shoving our beliefs down other
people's throats and we don't try to "convince" others to follow our
beliefs.
She is the one who said "we" to begin with, including herself with the
pro-lifers. She cannot say that she is a part of a group and then say that
said group doesn't do things that we all know they do. No, I don't know her
personally, but I do know the deeds of the group that she includes herself
in.
Laura
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
This is a direct quote from her post...
That strikes me as
ironic since we don't go around shoving our beliefs down other
people's throats and we don't try to "convince" others to follow our
beliefs.
She is the one who said "we" to begin with, including herself with the
pro-lifers. She cannot say that she is a part of a group and then say that
said group doesn't do things that we all know they do. No, I don't know her
personally, but I do know the deeds of the group that she includes herself
in.
Laura
>From: czuniga145@..._________________________________________________________________
>Reply-To: [email protected]
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Re: raising dogs & pro-life
>Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 20:58:29 EST
>
>In a message dated 1/30/01 5:17:26 PM Pacific Standard Time,
>lauramatec@... writes:
>
><< OH, BUT YOU DO!!!!!!!!!!! >>
>
>Do you know this woman personally?
>
>candice
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
[email protected]
I'll say it again - thank you, Candice, for interpreting the "we" for
what it is. And no, there isn't another person on the message board
who knows me or my family personally (or least that I know of).
I am a self-titled "pro-lifer" and there is no denial about what some
people in this group do. Just as I would believe that a "pro-
choicer" doesn't want to be considered a baby-killer just because
they believe in choice or what others are paid to do under the
title "abortion".
So, no, I do not blow up abortion clinics or kill abortionists. I do
not condone that behavior (my logic & heart says that would not be
respecting life very much, would it?). I personally do not believe
that every black person who was part of the civil rights movement was
a militant activist or that I am either just because I believe in
civil rights. Just as those who have committed unspeakable acts
against humanity in the name of their beliefs toward the government
are speaking or acting for me in anyway.
what it is. And no, there isn't another person on the message board
who knows me or my family personally (or least that I know of).
I am a self-titled "pro-lifer" and there is no denial about what some
people in this group do. Just as I would believe that a "pro-
choicer" doesn't want to be considered a baby-killer just because
they believe in choice or what others are paid to do under the
title "abortion".
So, no, I do not blow up abortion clinics or kill abortionists. I do
not condone that behavior (my logic & heart says that would not be
respecting life very much, would it?). I personally do not believe
that every black person who was part of the civil rights movement was
a militant activist or that I am either just because I believe in
civil rights. Just as those who have committed unspeakable acts
against humanity in the name of their beliefs toward the government
are speaking or acting for me in anyway.
--- In Unschooling-dotcom@y..., "Laura M" <lauramatec@h...> wrote:
> Candice,
>
> This is a direct quote from her post...
>
> That strikes me as
> ironic since we don't go around shoving our beliefs down other
> people's throats and we don't try to "convince" others to follow our
> beliefs.
>
> She is the one who said "we" to begin with, including herself with
the
> pro-lifers. She cannot say that she is a part of a group and then
say that
> said group doesn't do things that we all know they do. No, I don't
know her
> personally, but I do know the deeds of the group that she includes
herself
> in.
>
> Laura
>
> >From: czuniga145@a...
> >Reply-To: Unschooling-dotcom@y...
> >To: Unschooling-dotcom@y...
> >Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Re: raising dogs & pro-life
> >Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 20:58:29 EST
> >
> >In a message dated 1/30/01 5:17:26 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> >lauramatec@h... writes:
> >
> ><< OH, BUT YOU DO!!!!!!!!!!! >>
> >
> >Do you know this woman personally?
> >
> >candice
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
Mac and Carol Brown
Sandra wrote:
"But why on earth would you want to homeschool if you aren't a christian?" How
insulting! Or is it just *sad*?
across to the rest of the world, Sandra :-)
Carol
> Those homeschoolers sometimes cannot fathom why others would homeschool.I actually have been asked a couple of times, by bewildered christians:
"But why on earth would you want to homeschool if you aren't a christian?" How
insulting! Or is it just *sad*?
> We're not all doing the same thing.Well, thank goodness someone understands that <g> Just wish you could get it
across to the rest of the world, Sandra :-)
Carol
[email protected]
Susan,
Very well put!! I hope that you do not regret your post or your
comments and that the responses you get do not personally attack you
or your beliefs or your Catholicism.
Thank you,
Chris
Very well put!! I hope that you do not regret your post or your
comments and that the responses you get do not personally attack you
or your beliefs or your Catholicism.
Thank you,
Chris
--- In Unschooling-dotcom@y..., "Susan " <seaf@e...> wrote:
>
> I just have to respond, and I will probably regret
> it. I am a practicing Catholic and many of my closet friends, both
> spiritually and neighborly are baptists. Do I support the radical
pro-life
> movement that burns clinics and kills people? Of course not, and
I'd be
> hard pressed to name one person in my parish of well over a
thousand families
> who would support that kind of violence. In fact, I'd be hard
pressed to
> find a single person in my parish who would consider any other
person of any
> religion "evil." In fact, our priests regularly use protestant
Christians
> and members of other faiths as examples of holy life.
>
>
>
> While I certainly know from personal experience that
> some people of faith aren't tolerant, I am quite reluctant to group
everyone
> together. If anyone wants a generalization of Catholicism that
works
> for me, it is that we believe that Christ came to redeem the world--
and at some
> point everyone will be redeemed. Do I understand how that will
work?
> Of course not, and I really don't want to know. But do I believe
that if
> Christ would die to redeem the world-- every single person with
every single
> idiosyncrasy, can I condemn anyone? I think not.
>
>
>
> Sometimes people who are part of the radical fringe are
> just that--radically unbalanced. Probably whatever group gave them
some
> acceptance would be the beneficiary of their unbalanced sense of
> allegiance. I love life, and that will cause me to get involved
and help
> anyone I can to live a full life--old person, sick person, lonely
person,
> condemned person, unborn person. Yet, I could never take it upon
myself to
> judge and condemn another's actions.
>
>
>
> But please, don't take the old shibboleths and give
> them new life. I don't hate anyone, am not a "fundamentalist",
unless you
> mean I fundamentally believe God loves us all and we should strive
to do the
> same.....Susan---wife of one, mother of three, caretaker of
multiple four legged
> friends, friend to many...
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From:
>
> To: Unschooling-dotcom@y...
>
> Sent: 01/30/2001 6:03:08 PM
>
> Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Re:
> raising dogs pro-life
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Not right. Duty.
>
> I've been a fundamentalist Christian, and I honestly understand
their drive
>
>
> to proselytize and to help prevent sin.
>
>
>
> And naturally, the Catholics and the Baptists see one another as
> part of the
>
> Satanic evil.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!
>
> Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.com
>
>
>
> Addresses:
>
> Post message: [email protected]
>
> Unsubscribe: [email protected]
>
> List owner: [email protected]
>
> List settings page: http://www.egroups.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- seaf@e...
[email protected]
In a message dated 1/30/01 6:01:47 PM Pacific Standard Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:
<< I was also serious when I expressed amusement that in the very same week
birth control clinics are condemned but dog breeding is condemned too. NO
more dogs; LOTS more people. But it wasn't logic, it was religion, and I
forgot that for a second. >>
Not totally correct either. Not all pro-life views include a ban on birth
control. The belief is that the unborn is already fully human and thus it is
not a promotion of more humans but the same right to life as those already
born. Many people who embrace a pro-life view are in favor of and practice
birth control, usually those methods which prevent fertilization rather than
implantation.
Kris
SandraDodd@... writes:
<< I was also serious when I expressed amusement that in the very same week
birth control clinics are condemned but dog breeding is condemned too. NO
more dogs; LOTS more people. But it wasn't logic, it was religion, and I
forgot that for a second. >>
Not totally correct either. Not all pro-life views include a ban on birth
control. The belief is that the unborn is already fully human and thus it is
not a promotion of more humans but the same right to life as those already
born. Many people who embrace a pro-life view are in favor of and practice
birth control, usually those methods which prevent fertilization rather than
implantation.
Kris
Vicki A. Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: <louisaem@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 10:31 PM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Re: raising dogs & pro-life
> Many people who embrace a pro-life view are in favor of and practice
> birth control, usually those methods which prevent fertilization rather than
> implantation.
>
> Kris
>
Something I have wondered for years.............what is the "official"
pro-life view on how to proceed when a tubal pregnancy is discovered?
And I will go ahead and expose myself here......once I had borne a child I do
not know that I would be capable of choosing abortion for myself even under
extreme circumstances (but who can say for sure how one would proceed when
faced with reality instead of "if it were me"). I am adamantly
pro-choice----whether it be choice concerning elective sterilization (instead of
coerced after 1 healthy child for some races and incomes and denied for others
who seek it); choice of practicing reasonably safe means of family planning;
choice of attending a particular church or no church; choice to conceive a child
even if life partner is infertile; choice of means of education for self or
family; and yes, personal choice concerning whether to carry a particular
pregnancy into viability. I believe I can only claim to support choice if
I acknowledge that my choice might well differ from someone else's.
Vicki
[email protected]
In a message dated 1/30/01 7:07:50 PM Pacific Standard Time,
lauramatec@... writes:
<< She is the one who said "we" to begin with, including herself with the
pro-lifers. She cannot say that she is a part of a group and then say that
said group doesn't do things that we all know they do. No, I don't know her
personally, but I do know the deeds of the group that she includes herself
in. >>
Yes, it is a direct quote, but I took it that she was speaking of herself and
her family when she said "we." Why not give someone the benefit of the doubt
before jumping down their throats? When in doubt ask.
In addition, you can't possibly believe that most people with prolife
philosophy act like the screaming nuts in front of clinics. Bumper stickers
and the like are an exercise in free speech, and even so, I'd be willing to
bet that most prolife people don't use them or any other obvious sign of
their stance. It's like painting all Xians with a Jerry Falwell brush, or all
blacks with a Jesse Jackson brush, because they are the most vocal in those
groups.
I happen to be prolife to some extent. I don't have any bumper stickers,
posters, T-shirt or other paraphernalia to prove it though. I don't march or
protest, or even cast my votes based on that issue. The only time I even
discuss it with anyone outside of my personal circle of family and friends,
is when specifically asked. I have given advice to friends with unwanted
pregnancies, but always while acknowledging that it was ultimately their
decision and what I was saying was my *opinion*. Yet you would lump me into
the group of people who plant bombs at abortion clinics because I claim the
position of prolife? The silent majority in this group should be insulted.
candice
lauramatec@... writes:
<< She is the one who said "we" to begin with, including herself with the
pro-lifers. She cannot say that she is a part of a group and then say that
said group doesn't do things that we all know they do. No, I don't know her
personally, but I do know the deeds of the group that she includes herself
in. >>
Yes, it is a direct quote, but I took it that she was speaking of herself and
her family when she said "we." Why not give someone the benefit of the doubt
before jumping down their throats? When in doubt ask.
In addition, you can't possibly believe that most people with prolife
philosophy act like the screaming nuts in front of clinics. Bumper stickers
and the like are an exercise in free speech, and even so, I'd be willing to
bet that most prolife people don't use them or any other obvious sign of
their stance. It's like painting all Xians with a Jerry Falwell brush, or all
blacks with a Jesse Jackson brush, because they are the most vocal in those
groups.
I happen to be prolife to some extent. I don't have any bumper stickers,
posters, T-shirt or other paraphernalia to prove it though. I don't march or
protest, or even cast my votes based on that issue. The only time I even
discuss it with anyone outside of my personal circle of family and friends,
is when specifically asked. I have given advice to friends with unwanted
pregnancies, but always while acknowledging that it was ultimately their
decision and what I was saying was my *opinion*. Yet you would lump me into
the group of people who plant bombs at abortion clinics because I claim the
position of prolife? The silent majority in this group should be insulted.
candice
Susan
I just have to respond, and I will probably regret it. I am a practicing Catholic and many of my closet friends, both spiritually and neighborly are baptists. Do I support the radical pro-life movement that burns clinics and kills people? Of course not, and I'd be hard pressed to name one person in my parish of well over a thousand families who would support that kind of violence. In fact, I'd be hard pressed to find a single person in my parish who would consider any other person of any religion "evil." In fact, our priests regularly use protestant Christians and members of other faiths as examples of holy life.
While I certainly know from personal experience that some people of faith aren't tolerant, I am quite reluctant to group everyone together. If anyone wants a generalization of Catholicism that works for me, it is that we believe that Christ came to redeem the world--and at some point everyone will be redeemed. Do I understand how that will work? Of course not, and I really don't want to know. But do I believe that if Christ would die to redeem the world-- every single person with every single idiosyncrasy, can I condemn anyone? I think not.
Sometimes people who are part of the radical fringe are just that--radically unbalanced. Probably whatever group gave them some acceptance would be the beneficiary of their unbalanced sense of allegiance. I love life, and that will cause me to get involved and help anyone I can to live a full life--old person, sick person, lonely person, condemned person, unborn person. Yet, I could never take it upon myself to judge and condemn another's actions.
But please, don't take the old shibboleths and give them new life. I don't hate anyone, am not a "fundamentalist", unless you mean I fundamentally believe God loves us all and we should strive to do the same.....Susan---wife of one, mother of three, caretaker of multiple four legged friends, friend to many...
----- Original Message -----Sent: 01/30/2001 6:03:08 PMSubject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Re: raising dogs & pro-life
Not right. Duty.I've been a fundamentalist Christian, and I honestly understand their driveto proselytize and to help prevent sin.And naturally, the Catholics and the Baptists see one another as part of theSatanic evil.Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.comAddresses:Post message: [email protected]Unsubscribe: [email protected]List owner: [email protected]List settings page: http://www.egroups.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom--- seaf@...
[email protected]
In a message dated 1/30/01 9:30:27 PM Pacific Standard Time,
mamaxaos@... writes:
<< Something I have wondered for years.............what is the "official"
pro-life view on how to proceed when a tubal pregnancy is discovered?
or Pagan, or Pro-Choice, view on any one thing, there cannot be an official
Pro-Life view. Different organizations can espouse anythiing they want, but
that doesn't make it so. Pro-Life is just an adjective not a government body
or all-encompassing organization. Prolifers can fall in different places on a
spectrum.
candice
mamaxaos@... writes:
<< Something I have wondered for years.............what is the "official"
pro-life view on how to proceed when a tubal pregnancy is discovered?
>>Just like there is no official African-American, or Hispanic, or Christian,
or Pagan, or Pro-Choice, view on any one thing, there cannot be an official
Pro-Life view. Different organizations can espouse anythiing they want, but
that doesn't make it so. Pro-Life is just an adjective not a government body
or all-encompassing organization. Prolifers can fall in different places on a
spectrum.
candice
[email protected]
In a message dated 01/30/01 9:14:33 PM, mjcmbrwn@... writes:
<< Well, thank goodness someone understands that <g> Just wish you could get
it
across to the rest of the world, Sandra :-) >>
I try, but I get jumped on by people saying "You can't speak for Christians"
or "You can't speak for all unschoolers."
I can tell what I know to be true of MANY of both groups. I'm not making
things up. Some people think that by reciting peaceful-sounding platitudes,
that the problems go away and that the harsher realities are unfocussed (like
a movie closeup during the mushy-music parts).
Sandra
<< Well, thank goodness someone understands that <g> Just wish you could get
it
across to the rest of the world, Sandra :-) >>
I try, but I get jumped on by people saying "You can't speak for Christians"
or "You can't speak for all unschoolers."
I can tell what I know to be true of MANY of both groups. I'm not making
things up. Some people think that by reciting peaceful-sounding platitudes,
that the problems go away and that the harsher realities are unfocussed (like
a movie closeup during the mushy-music parts).
Sandra
[email protected]
In a message dated 01/30/01 11:22:54 PM, czuniga145@... writes:
<< Just like there is no official African-American, or Hispanic, or
Christian,
or Pagan, or Pro-Choice, view on any one thing, there cannot be an official
Pro-Life view. >>
There ARE official points of view. How many different pro-life organizations
are there? Knights of Columbus (who go STRICTLY by Papal edict) and... any
other literature-producing organization?
<< Just like there is no official African-American, or Hispanic, or
Christian,
or Pagan, or Pro-Choice, view on any one thing, there cannot be an official
Pro-Life view. >>
There ARE official points of view. How many different pro-life organizations
are there? Knights of Columbus (who go STRICTLY by Papal edict) and... any
other literature-producing organization?
[email protected]
In a message dated 1/30/01 10:06:39 PM Pacific Standard Time,
czuniga145@... writes:
<< In addition, you can't possibly believe that most people with prolife
philosophy act like the screaming nuts in front of clinics. Bumper stickers
and the like are an exercise in free speech, and even so, I'd be willing to
bet that most prolife people don't use them or any other obvious sign of
their stance. It's like painting all Xians with a Jerry Falwell brush, or
all
blacks with a Jesse Jackson brush, because they are the most vocal in those
groups. >>
Conservatives, those who voice a pro-life or any other unpopular opinion seem
to be the group it's okay to express and feel unreasonable suspicion toward.
Those who claim and demonstrate tolerance in most other situations seem to
lose their cool when confronting these types. Their reason usually boils
down to the fact that these folks are so "intolerant".
I can understand some of the reaction but to assume so much about another's
beliefs and attitudes is beyond me. I'm sure I'm guilty of the same but I
hope I have grown beyond it by now.
Kris
czuniga145@... writes:
<< In addition, you can't possibly believe that most people with prolife
philosophy act like the screaming nuts in front of clinics. Bumper stickers
and the like are an exercise in free speech, and even so, I'd be willing to
bet that most prolife people don't use them or any other obvious sign of
their stance. It's like painting all Xians with a Jerry Falwell brush, or
all
blacks with a Jesse Jackson brush, because they are the most vocal in those
groups. >>
Conservatives, those who voice a pro-life or any other unpopular opinion seem
to be the group it's okay to express and feel unreasonable suspicion toward.
Those who claim and demonstrate tolerance in most other situations seem to
lose their cool when confronting these types. Their reason usually boils
down to the fact that these folks are so "intolerant".
I can understand some of the reaction but to assume so much about another's
beliefs and attitudes is beyond me. I'm sure I'm guilty of the same but I
hope I have grown beyond it by now.
Kris
[email protected]
In a message dated 01/31/01 12:41:06 AM, louisaem@... writes:
<< << I was also serious when I expressed amusement that in the very same
week
birth control clinics are condemned but dog breeding is condemned too. NO
more dogs; LOTS more people. But it wasn't logic, it was religion, and I
forgot that for a second. >>
<<Not totally correct either. Not all pro-life views include a ban on birth
control. >>
Not totally correct!?
The original matter was funding for clinics overseas, and it was clarified
that the funding ban was affecting birth control education. The paragraph
above doesn't mention pro-life.
<< Many people who embrace a pro-life view are in favor of and practice
birth control, usually those methods which prevent fertilization rather than
implantation.>>
Many but not most.
There are a badillion Catholics.
<< << I was also serious when I expressed amusement that in the very same
week
birth control clinics are condemned but dog breeding is condemned too. NO
more dogs; LOTS more people. But it wasn't logic, it was religion, and I
forgot that for a second. >>
<<Not totally correct either. Not all pro-life views include a ban on birth
control. >>
Not totally correct!?
The original matter was funding for clinics overseas, and it was clarified
that the funding ban was affecting birth control education. The paragraph
above doesn't mention pro-life.
<< Many people who embrace a pro-life view are in favor of and practice
birth control, usually those methods which prevent fertilization rather than
implantation.>>
Many but not most.
There are a badillion Catholics.
[email protected]
I really wish this would stop. I understand that we can consider discussions
about topics such as nursing and cosleeping to be included in unschooling.
This fighting over political and religious beliefs is really getting on my
nerves and doesn't seem to be contributing anything at all to this community.
I don't think we need to all agree but what purpose does this serve? PLEASE
STOP!!!!!! I'm sorry if I offend anyone but at the moment that seems to be
unavoidable. -Amalia-
about topics such as nursing and cosleeping to be included in unschooling.
This fighting over political and religious beliefs is really getting on my
nerves and doesn't seem to be contributing anything at all to this community.
I don't think we need to all agree but what purpose does this serve? PLEASE
STOP!!!!!! I'm sorry if I offend anyone but at the moment that seems to be
unavoidable. -Amalia-
[email protected]
In a message dated 1/30/01 9:30:27 PM Pacific Standard Time,
mamaxaos@... writes:
<< Something I have wondered for years.............what is the "official"
pro-life view on how to proceed when a tubal pregnancy is discovered?
known and myself believe that when it comes down to this issue it's just a
matter of common sense. A tubal pregnancy has no hope of a live birth and
would eventually lead to the mother's death. There would be no reason to let
the pregnancy continue.
Kris
mamaxaos@... writes:
<< Something I have wondered for years.............what is the "official"
pro-life view on how to proceed when a tubal pregnancy is discovered?
>> >>There is no way I could speak for all "pro-lifers" but most of those I have
known and myself believe that when it comes down to this issue it's just a
matter of common sense. A tubal pregnancy has no hope of a live birth and
would eventually lead to the mother's death. There would be no reason to let
the pregnancy continue.
Kris
[email protected]
<< Many people who embrace a pro-life view are in favor of and practice
birth control, usually those methods which prevent fertilization rather than
implantation.>>
Many but not most.
There are a badillion Catholics. >>>
I am a practicing catholic, and I have to inject here. The "official" position of the Pope is anti-birth control. However, in the US, most churches realize are somewhat more lax on certain issues. And while abstinence is taught and obviously taken as the position of the church, we are also not ignorant of todays society. So people aren't stoned because they chose to use bc. Most people would agree that given the choice of using bc or having an abortion, bc is the better of the two "evils". It is (in my humble opinion) wrong to have an abortion. I consider myself pro-choice.... the choice part is chosing to have sex in the first place, unprotected or otherwise. As with all choices in life, there are consequences. This one being the possibility of pregnancy. Not to start a big debate here, but I just wanted to point out that even as a Catholic we are not completely out of touch with reality, and there are certian "church laws" that have become less rigid.
--- Fanchon
birth control, usually those methods which prevent fertilization rather than
implantation.>>
Many but not most.
There are a badillion Catholics. >>>
I am a practicing catholic, and I have to inject here. The "official" position of the Pope is anti-birth control. However, in the US, most churches realize are somewhat more lax on certain issues. And while abstinence is taught and obviously taken as the position of the church, we are also not ignorant of todays society. So people aren't stoned because they chose to use bc. Most people would agree that given the choice of using bc or having an abortion, bc is the better of the two "evils". It is (in my humble opinion) wrong to have an abortion. I consider myself pro-choice.... the choice part is chosing to have sex in the first place, unprotected or otherwise. As with all choices in life, there are consequences. This one being the possibility of pregnancy. Not to start a big debate here, but I just wanted to point out that even as a Catholic we are not completely out of touch with reality, and there are certian "church laws" that have become less rigid.
--- Fanchon
[email protected]
In a message dated 1/30/01 11:57:55 PM Pacific Standard Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:
<< There ARE official points of view. How many different pro-life
organizations
are there? Knights of Columbus (who go STRICTLY by Papal edict) and... any
other literature-producing organization?
within the same church have varied a bit in their views on the issue. Not
all those who are pro-life are so because of religion.
I have come to question and even reject some of the teaching I have gotten
over the years but this is one issue that stands alone. My objections would
exist independent of my faith.
Kris
SandraDodd@... writes:
<< There ARE official points of view. How many different pro-life
organizations
are there? Knights of Columbus (who go STRICTLY by Papal edict) and... any
other literature-producing organization?
>>Of all the folks I know none of them belong to an organization. Even those
within the same church have varied a bit in their views on the issue. Not
all those who are pro-life are so because of religion.
I have come to question and even reject some of the teaching I have gotten
over the years but this is one issue that stands alone. My objections would
exist independent of my faith.
Kris
[email protected]
In a message dated 1/31/01 12:18:27 AM Pacific Standard Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:
<< << << I was also serious when I expressed amusement that in the very same
week
birth control clinics are condemned but dog breeding is condemned too. NO
more dogs; LOTS more people. But it wasn't logic, it was religion, and I
forgot that for a second. >>
<<Not totally correct either. Not all pro-life views include a ban on birth
control. >>
Not totally correct!?
The original matter was funding for clinics overseas, and it was clarified
that the funding ban was affecting birth control education. The paragraph
above doesn't mention pro-life.>>
I was referring to the statement about "no more dogs; lots more people". Was
I wrong in assuming that this was a reference to the Catholic ban on birth
control? It sounded, to me, as though you were associating pro-life with
anti birth control.
<< Many people who embrace a pro-life view are in favor of and practice
birth control, usually those methods which prevent fertilization rather than
implantation.>>
Many but not most.
There are a badillion Catholics.>>
I don't have numbers to argue the point, you could be right. Many pro-life
folks don't speak out or demonstrate so it's difficult to know. Some
non-Catholics object to birth control as well.
Kris
SandraDodd@... writes:
<< << << I was also serious when I expressed amusement that in the very same
week
birth control clinics are condemned but dog breeding is condemned too. NO
more dogs; LOTS more people. But it wasn't logic, it was religion, and I
forgot that for a second. >>
<<Not totally correct either. Not all pro-life views include a ban on birth
control. >>
Not totally correct!?
The original matter was funding for clinics overseas, and it was clarified
that the funding ban was affecting birth control education. The paragraph
above doesn't mention pro-life.>>
I was referring to the statement about "no more dogs; lots more people". Was
I wrong in assuming that this was a reference to the Catholic ban on birth
control? It sounded, to me, as though you were associating pro-life with
anti birth control.
<< Many people who embrace a pro-life view are in favor of and practice
birth control, usually those methods which prevent fertilization rather than
implantation.>>
Many but not most.
There are a badillion Catholics.>>
I don't have numbers to argue the point, you could be right. Many pro-life
folks don't speak out or demonstrate so it's difficult to know. Some
non-Catholics object to birth control as well.
Kris
[email protected]
I prefer to be labeled "pro-support". I believe that if children and
parenting were as valued as they should be abortion would become rare. We,
especially those who speak out against abortion, need to put our money, time
and lives on the line to support women caught in this dilemma.
Choice is a weak term when women feel pressured to end a pregnancy because of
the stigma choosing to give birth can carry. The message is often clear,
"Keep that baby and you're just ignorant poor trash. You'll waste your life
raising that kid. Make the 'enlightened' choice and you'll be free." No
wonder abortion is seen as such a "need".
Kris
parenting were as valued as they should be abortion would become rare. We,
especially those who speak out against abortion, need to put our money, time
and lives on the line to support women caught in this dilemma.
Choice is a weak term when women feel pressured to end a pregnancy because of
the stigma choosing to give birth can carry. The message is often clear,
"Keep that baby and you're just ignorant poor trash. You'll waste your life
raising that kid. Make the 'enlightened' choice and you'll be free." No
wonder abortion is seen as such a "need".
Kris
[email protected]
In a message dated 1/30/2001 6:04:01 PM Pacific Standard Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:
I am Catholic, and do not see anyone, Baptist or pagan or agnostic or atheist
as evil. I respect their belief as their own and believe everyone is united
in our humaness and this world is big enough for everyone regardless of any
differences in beliefs. I was taught to respect and celebrate differences in
others by my catholic parents and always remember what makes us same - being
human. Maybe that comes from growing up in New Jersey, close to NYC, where
there are so many different religions and races all living together. I do
beleive there are evil people in this world and that evil can be found in all
races, all religions all kinds of people. It usually starts with intolerance
and disrespect.
This debate is healthy as long as we respect each others opinions and
differences and remember our sameness, our humaness.
Dawn (also a monkey's cousin, as a matter of fact)
SandraDodd@... writes:
And naturally, the Catholics and the Baptists see one another as part of the
Satanic evil.
I am Catholic, and do not see anyone, Baptist or pagan or agnostic or atheist
as evil. I respect their belief as their own and believe everyone is united
in our humaness and this world is big enough for everyone regardless of any
differences in beliefs. I was taught to respect and celebrate differences in
others by my catholic parents and always remember what makes us same - being
human. Maybe that comes from growing up in New Jersey, close to NYC, where
there are so many different religions and races all living together. I do
beleive there are evil people in this world and that evil can be found in all
races, all religions all kinds of people. It usually starts with intolerance
and disrespect.
This debate is healthy as long as we respect each others opinions and
differences and remember our sameness, our humaness.
Dawn (also a monkey's cousin, as a matter of fact)
[email protected]
In a message dated 1/30/2001 6:35:21 PM Pacific Standard Time,
kkibort@... writes:
LOL, Kerry! Dawn
kkibort@... writes:
Kerry, your cousin and possibly also a monkey
LOL, Kerry! Dawn
[email protected]
In a message dated 1/31/2001 1:25:16 AM Pacific Standard Time,
louisaem@... writes:
Wow, Kris - great way to put it. I am Catholic, yet pro birth control and
pro-choice. But i think pro-support as you put it is certainly teh ideal I
have been truly looking for.
Dawn
louisaem@... writes:
I prefer to be labeled "pro-support". I believe that if children and
parenting were as valued as they should be abortion would become rare. We,
especially those who speak out against abortion, need to put our money,
time
and lives on the line to support women caught in this dilemma.
Choice is a weak term when women feel pressured to end a pregnancy because
of
the stigma choosing to give birth can carry. The message is often clear,
"Keep that baby and you're just ignorant poor trash. You'll waste your
life
raising that kid. Make the 'enlightened' choice and you'll be free." No
wonder abortion is seen as such a "need".
Kris
Wow, Kris - great way to put it. I am Catholic, yet pro birth control and
pro-choice. But i think pro-support as you put it is certainly teh ideal I
have been truly looking for.
Dawn
[email protected]
In a message dated 1/31/01 3:26:44 Uhr, SandraDodd@... writes:
<< There are a badillion Catholics.
the Pope, doesn't mean they don't use it. Kimme
<< There are a badillion Catholics.
>>Many Catholics (most) use birth control. Just because it's not sanctioned by
the Pope, doesn't mean they don't use it. Kimme
[email protected]
Amalia, If you find the discussion so upsetting you can use the delete
button;)
button;)
[email protected]
In a message dated 1/31/01 12:45:28 PM Mountain Standard Time,
squeaksoup@... writes:
squeaksoup@... writes:
Many Catholics (most) use birth control.
I'm guessing when you wrote "(most)" you meant Americans of your
acquaintance. There are Catholic countries in which birth control is not
available, or is illegal, because the Pope doesn't want it used and the state
religion is Catholicism. The U.S. isn't the most Catholic of nations, nor
the most cooperative of nations among the very many Catholic nations.
Tracy Oldfield
I know this is a heated topic, a bit tough on me when
I've come back to the list after a couple of days lying
up cos I'm washed out cos I'm pregnant, but hey, what
can one do? (except keep one's legs crossed...
joking) I wanted to comment on this, cos I've been
there. It's the old 'walk a mile in the other person's
shoes' innit?
parenting were as valued as they should be abortion
would become rare. We,
especially those who speak out against abortion, need
to put our money, time
and lives on the line to support women caught in this
dilemma.
Choice is a weak term when women feel pressured to end
a pregnancy because of
the stigma choosing to give birth can carry. The
message is often clear,
"Keep that baby and you're just ignorant poor trash.
You'll waste your life
raising that kid. Make the 'enlightened' choice and
you'll be free." No
wonder abortion is seen as such a "need".
Kris
<<<
I freely entered into a pregnancy, though I was young,
I was in what i thought was a stable relationship, and
my partner at that time had expressed the desire for
children, so I thought we would be OK. When I became
pregnant, he changed his mind. I believe that children
deserve two parents, and a better quality of life that
I would have had resources to provide (physical,
emotional and spiritual.) No-one actually listened or
properly counselled me during this time, though I think
I would still have come to the same conclusion, and I
had a termination. What is my point? That at the most
difficult of times circumstances change, and the
facilities for supporting people through those
circumstances must exist. There will, I believe always
be unwanted pregnancies unless we have a totally
fascist state which requires people to use birth
control unless they are registered prospective parents
(sometimes even this is appealing, but only sometimes)
so facilities where they can be terminated safely must
exist. Proper support for adoption must also exist,
the case of the British couple and the twins is a case
in point. Pointing fingers and laying blame helps no-
one. Working towards common preferences and goals
helps everyone.
Respectfuly
Tracy
I've come back to the list after a couple of days lying
up cos I'm washed out cos I'm pregnant, but hey, what
can one do? (except keep one's legs crossed...
joking) I wanted to comment on this, cos I've been
there. It's the old 'walk a mile in the other person's
shoes' innit?
>>>I prefer to be labeled "pro-support". I believethat if children and
parenting were as valued as they should be abortion
would become rare. We,
especially those who speak out against abortion, need
to put our money, time
and lives on the line to support women caught in this
dilemma.
Choice is a weak term when women feel pressured to end
a pregnancy because of
the stigma choosing to give birth can carry. The
message is often clear,
"Keep that baby and you're just ignorant poor trash.
You'll waste your life
raising that kid. Make the 'enlightened' choice and
you'll be free." No
wonder abortion is seen as such a "need".
Kris
<<<
I freely entered into a pregnancy, though I was young,
I was in what i thought was a stable relationship, and
my partner at that time had expressed the desire for
children, so I thought we would be OK. When I became
pregnant, he changed his mind. I believe that children
deserve two parents, and a better quality of life that
I would have had resources to provide (physical,
emotional and spiritual.) No-one actually listened or
properly counselled me during this time, though I think
I would still have come to the same conclusion, and I
had a termination. What is my point? That at the most
difficult of times circumstances change, and the
facilities for supporting people through those
circumstances must exist. There will, I believe always
be unwanted pregnancies unless we have a totally
fascist state which requires people to use birth
control unless they are registered prospective parents
(sometimes even this is appealing, but only sometimes)
so facilities where they can be terminated safely must
exist. Proper support for adoption must also exist,
the case of the British couple and the twins is a case
in point. Pointing fingers and laying blame helps no-
one. Working towards common preferences and goals
helps everyone.
Respectfuly
Tracy