[quote]Originally posted by Anne Bryant-Hamon:
Lo,
Another thing I found odd for this "pro-lifer" is that I heard she had an amniocentesis before giving birth and was told the baby had Down's Syndrome. Unless things have changed since I was birthing babies, getting an amniocentesis is an unnecessary risk that sometimes causes spontaneous miscarriage. Why would anyone who would not consider an abortion take such a risk? It makes no sense at all.
Last time I checked, knowing something and acting on something were two different things. I have no problem with amnio. There is, as you say, a slight risk to the fetus, but the benefits far outweigh the possible consequences. Amnio can not only tell you your child is Downs, it can also tell you that your fetus needs surgery or your child needs for you to take special medications. It's becoming more and more common for life saving fetal surgeries to be performed. Amnio is more about saving life than it is aborting it.
And call me old fashioned, but I think it is child neglect to have five children AND pursue a time-consuming career.
What if the woman is working out of necessity, Anne? Is it still child neglect? What if she has only one child, or two or three? Is it still neglect? If so, you're going to be condemning a whole lot of women as neglectful parents. Myself included. I fail to see how my working in order to feed and shelter my children makes me a neglectful parent - and I worked at not one but two time-consuming careers. Are dad's exempt? I mean, someone's got to work, don't they? Why would a mother be considered neglectful and her husband be considered successful for doing the same damn thing?
I heard a rumor on one of the talk shows on Air America that her 17 year old unmarried daughter is thought to be pregnant. I can't confirm that -- just something a caller said.
The rumor is that the child named Trig is the daughter's child. It's not just being bandied about on Air America, it's all over The Internet. I did not mention it because it is, as you say, a rumor. Much like "Obama is a Muslim" is a rumor. It is without basis and potentially harmful. I am unsure why anyone would wish to spread it.
And, although it's off topic, I do feel the burning need to ask - what the hell difference would it make if her 17 year old unmarried daughter was pregnant? Have you any idea of the percentage of unwed pregnancies in the world today? It wouldn't even make her the slightest bit of unique nor would it be the slightest bit scandalous.
I was an unmarried teenaged pregnant girl way back when. So freakin' what? My mother should have hid in the closet and taken me with her for the duration of the pregnancy? Your children are your children, when they make mistakes you ache for them, you pray for them, you care for them, you do not give up your right to pride or your accomplishments because of it.
The right-wing base is very happy with McCain's pick. I think they're all insane.
I think you've shared that opinion with us already.
During the debates, I'd really like someone to ask her point blank if she believes that non-Christians are all going to hell when they die because they have not confessed the name of Jesus before taking their last breath. Most, if not all fundamentalist Christians do believe that very literally and it is a belief written in many church statements of faith.
And that would prove what, Anne? My mother is Catholic and she believes that, my son is Baptist and he believes that. I'd still trust them both with my life. What people believe is or should be a non-issue. When and if they attempt to order me to believe it, then and only then does it become an issue. Last time I checked, most fundamentalist Christians are not ordering anyone to feel the rapture. The fact that some of them might wish it for us is immaterial. It's nice they care - I'm happy to leave it at that if they are.
I'm much more upset at the idea that Sarah Palin has been instrumental in getting The State of Alaska to allow aerial hunting of wolves and brown bears. I'm upset that she thinks grown men with rifles shooting defenseless animals while hovering above them in small planes and helicopters is sporting behaviour.
I'm much more upset that she was offering a $150.00 bounty for each wolf killed because wolves are the natural predators of caribou and moose and she apparently believes that man is the only animal which should be allowed to kill caribou and moose. I'm upset that she refused to quit allowing the bounty to be paid in spite of various lawsuits and the fact that the majority of Alaskan citizens opposed it until The Supreme Court of Alaska stepped in and disallowed it for her. I'm upset that The Alaska Board and Game Commission is still attempting to reinstate the bounty and that the Alaska Board and Game Commission is appointed and controlled by, you guessed it, the Governor of Alaska.
I'm upset that the governor-appointed Gaming Commission has voted to open up the land immediately ajoining a brown bear sanctuary to hunters even though the bears who live there are virtually tame due to the high volume of human visitors to the sanctuary. Brown bears are unaware of the unmarked border between safety and death - like all creatures, they do not recognise where their safety ends and a hunter's sport begins. These brown bears are particularly at risk since they have no fear of humans having been raised in close proximity to them throughout their lives. For years the area near their haven has been off-limits to hunters - but since Sarah took office all that's changed.
If she's consistantly refusing to protect the dumb animal creatures entrusted to her governorship and care because a special interest group whose interests she shares wishes her to - how does she expect us to believe her when she promises to care for us - especially if our interests differ from her own.
Lo
edited to remove thread stretching links. Why is this happening???? If anyone needs or wants the links for confirmation, PM me, please.
[This message has been edited by Laura Heidy-Halberstein (edited August 30, 2008).]
|