Recess Homework

"It grants special rights to homosexuals while ignoring those of employers. The federal government should not force private businesses to abandon their moral principles. "

If it gets shot down thanks to FRC I promise I will fire every heterosexual person that works for me. I will also evict any hetersexuals that I find living in the apartments that I own. After all, heterosexuals are known to be promiscuous drug users who often engage in Unnatural Acts like Sodomy. I should not be forced to support such a decadent immoral lifestyle. No Special Rights for Heterosexuals!

Hate Crimes: While I support the hate-crimes legislation, I find it most annoying that it is being passed as a rider on an unrelated bill.
Before anyone claims this is a 'liberal trick,' I have seen conservative legislation pushed through as unrelated riders on just as many occasions.

Judges: Given the Bush administration appointment scandles, and his history of appointing judges who are either very conservative or actively partisan in favour of the republicans, I think it is perfectly reasonable to treat his appointments as highly suspect.

Abstinance: Good. Abstinance education doesn't work. There are plenty of studies that have shown this. Its effects are slim to none. The only reason it continues to be pushed is the victorian values of organisations like the FRC.

Stem cells: Oh, I see this recurring theme in FRC posts - the false impression that research has to be on either embryonic or adult/cord cells. This is not an either-or proposition: Both classes of cell have their advantages and disadvantages, and both can be studied at once. As for the veto... nope, cant be overridden. This is a party loyalty thing - no way enough republicans will vote against the party line for a two-thirds majority.

ENDA: This issue is far too complicated to be explained here, but I think I shall dedicate a future blog-post to the abstract princibles behind it.

Fake pro-life bills: Why fake? If you want to reduce the incidence of abortions, a simple way to do so is to encourage the use of contraception. Obviously not much good against abortions for medical reasons, but for those as a result of unintended pregnency... no pregnency, no abortion.

Plan B can act as an abortificant (By the pro-life definition, not the narrower medical definition*), but rarely. More often, it prevents ovulation, or failing that prevents fertilisation. I dont have numbers to crunch, but I suspect that the number of abortions it *prevents* when acting as a contraceptive might be higher than the number it causes.

One problem with the pro-life movement its its current inability to accept even a single abortion. They have raised abortion now up to such a level of 'evil' that much of the political faction cannot accept that abortion could be justified, even once, under any circumstances - even if this abortion is required to save the life of the woman. They cant weigh choices at all, only think with an 'abortion=evil' reflex that permits no exceptions.

*Pregnency doesn't begin at fertilisation. It begins at implantation, as this is the first point at which the woman's own biology is in any way affected. Abortion aborts a pregnency. So you cant have an abortion until after implantation, in medical terms. Pro-lifers have a different definition.

Education: Dispite working in a school, I dont think im qualified to have any strong oppinion on US education policy. I have only the vaguest of ideas what NCLB does.

Pro-life riders: Here we see the abovementioned problem with pro-life in politics rise again. The no-funding-abortions policy is sufficiently over-broad to be harmful, as it serves to deny funding to many of those organisations best capable of combatting the spread of HIV. In their zealous attempt to stop every last abortion at any cost, pro-lifers are often incapable of understanding that their policies can actually cause harm in other ways. MC not only prohibits funding for organisations that perform abortions, but for organisations that refer to them, or even organisations that suggest it as an option to pregnent women. It effectively cuts off a very large chunk of the charitable organisation and medical sector as punishment for not following the political views of those who made it.

And with regards to those "coercive abortion and sterilization programs" mentioned, what exactly are they? The only such programs of which I am aware are run by sections of the Chinese government, which is certinly in no need of US funding. If you wish to accuse your political opponents of a charge so terrible as supportin coercive abortion and sterilization, you *must* be able to back up your claim with some serious evidence. Yet the FRC has not offered even the name of one of the programs for which funding is proposed. Without being able to show a link between the FO bills, an organisation they fund, and coercive abortion or sterilization programs... these accusations are worthless. Nothing but cheap political points.

While I normally ignore the "writings" of Suricou Raving I did want to point out that Plan B acting as a "sometimes" abortifacient is by definition of the manufacturer, not by people on the pro-life side. It even says so on the packaging

Learn how to spell Suricou
I will be praying for our representatives that they have the courage to support the good things coming up in the falls. It's not easy when they have elections in the wings. I believe that Abstinence Education is the cheapest way to prevent unwanted pregnancies, STD's and we'll have a lot happier students.

Abstinence Education is the cheapest way to prevent nothing. Unfortunately, it does not work. We must move on and find a new method to prevent unwanted pregnancies and STD. As for happier students, what planet do you live on?

I think there might be just a bit of
evidence that abstinance-only education is ineffective. The occasional professional condemnation, too.

I checked all those. No study is reported in more than one link.

James, are you saying that a student will get STD's regardless?? Isn't that the cause "sexually transmitted diseases". You just can't face the truth.

Hail, Hail Pastor Lusk Way to Go

Suricou,

Only two issues you brought up I have problems with. The rest I will chalk up to just a difference in values and quality of life.

1. Abstinence programs in the schools don't work because they have been way underfunded (starved so that planned Parenthood - a contradiction in terms for them - could continue to gorge on our tax dollars), and because most teachers just did not include it in their curriculum in favor a a more liberal approach to sex education. Abstinence, medically, is the ONLY way to 100% prevent pregnancies.

2. All stem cell research is not one and the same. Killing the "unwanted" babies for their stem cells for which research has yielded much less positive results than those done on adult stem cell not only smacks of a really cheesy horror/science fiction movie, but leads me to believe that the liberal and morally bankrupt people who are for this type of barbary really believe that they should decide who lives and who dies at the expense of another.

3. In EITHER CASE, government and MY TAX DOLLARS should not be funding murder . . . and it is murder. Period.

Corn only grows when you plant a seed.
Who does disease come from?

I am so thankful for the information regarding issues of importance to my family. I was sorry to read comments by people who are hostile to these ideals, but I appreciate FRC for its willingness to post these remarks, anyway.

Abstinence Would work if parents sat down with their children and would teach them about sex, instead of letting the schools or government teach them SEX ED.

" Abstinence programs in the schools don't work because they have been way underfunded (starved so that planned Parenthood - a contradiction in terms for them - could continue to gorge on our tax dollars), and because most teachers just did not include it in their curriculum in favor a a more liberal approach to sex education. Abstinence, medically, is the ONLY way to 100% prevent pregnancies."

No dear. The reason Abstinence programs don't work is that like adults, teenagers like to have sex.

I wrote a very long, detailed post about a week ago, but it never appeared here. All the talk of sex and condoms must have set off the profanity-filter.

I am getting sick of this 'Abstinance is 100% effective' mantra. It is not obvious why the claim is false? Of course abstinance is 100% effective, but only on the condition that *everyone* remains abstinant, *always*. Its completly unrealistic. Teenagers have all the power of their hormones driving them, live in a very sexualised culture, and spend most of their time with friends who are just as hormone-driven. The majority are going to have had sex by the age of twenty, and no ammount of lecturing them is going to change that. Even if the scare tactics are used, you just cant fight sex with any degree of success today.

Abstinance also does absolutly nothing to address the post-marriage situation. Its founded on the pre-sexual-revolution assumption that once someone has a married partner, they are going to want children - this romantic 50's family life, where every child is wanted, loved and cared for. What happens if a woman marries and wants to persue a career, or if the couple doesn't have the income to raise a child? They get pregnent anyway, because under abstinance-education they have been told nothing of how to use contraception.

Abstinance education really is an attempt to turn the clock back - to return to those times before contraception, when the gender roles were clearly defined, and the idea that a woman could be happy in any role other than baby-maker was unthinkable.

Ugh... I know my spelling is poor, but that post is a disaster even by my standards...

I have been reading about courtship and that it
is the father's responsibility to protect and defend his daughter's honor. Where are the parents? If it didn't take two incomes for most people to live these days, maybe the parents could keep track of their children. The media and the public schools are causing the children to believe it's okay to sleep around, but that is not God's plan for his children.