snuffy65

I'm am mostly talking about college students. The teachers are more concerned about giving out "A"s rather then giving students the chance to learn. It's not all teachers, but I can tell you about 70% of the people that will be graduating with me with a degree in computer networking, wouldn;t know the first thing to do if they got that job. It's becuase most classes I took the teacher would give out a test and if you failed they would give out an easier test. I talked with a director my parents knew and he laughed and said the same thing I just said, "teachers too busy giving out A's rather then teaching students to earn an A." He went on to say that the teachers are critiqued by average grades and student feedback forms. Sad. However the same goes with parents. Maybe its me, but it seems more parents blame schools rather then their children no matter what the problem is. Thats just wrong. My parents were vary involved with the schools when me and my bro & sisters were there. We didn't get away with nothing and I would probably get smacked if I tried blaming it on a teacher.

I agree parents ahve alot to do with it. But I just went back to college and cannot beleive the things I hear students and teachers talking about when it comes to " getting around the system". Speaking of parents, you ever watch "Wife swap" TV show? If you do you will remember this episode. If you can't watch all 5 minutes skip the 2:00 mark and watch from there about her school work. Too funny! Oh and don;t get me started on beauty teen mom's! Here's the link! [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7GpFFbfTLg]YouTube - Wife Swap - Alicia Guastaferro, Beauty Queen From Hell[/ame] :eek::thumbup::eek::thumbup::eek:

"The central holding of Roe v. Wade was that abortions are permissible for any reason a woman chooses, up until the "point at which the fetus becomes ‘viable,’ that is, potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid. Viability is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks."The Court also held that abortion after viability must be available when needed to protect a woman's health, which the court defined as broadly in the companion case of Doe v. Bolton. These court rulings affected laws in 46 states." No, I would still be arguing the above decision. However, remember that the supreme court has to consider the Constitution before making a decision. So any changes to the constitution could change me and the judges decision. Sure and yes they were wrong. Doesn't mean the supreme court is wrong now. What else qualifies a life as human life that would set dead person apart from a live human? A heartbeat? Brain function? A doctor pronounces death when there is no longer a heartbeat for a period of time where the brain would not survive. Which is why earlier I said you could argue that after 6-8 weeks you might consider the fetus alive. I would not make it illegal but like any other semi risky procedure I would rather have them use something else like pills as birth control rather then that. But see the difference between you and me is that I would educate as many woman against the procedure and more towards abstinence and/or birth control but wouldn't arrest anyone when they opted for abortion. A gotcha moment would be like the question about what makes a black person human. Most prochoice people off the cusp would probably say " black people have the same DNA has other human" You would then say "GOTCHA! fertilized eggs have DNA so why aren't they human beings". It's quite comical because I've been in these arguments alot and the minute you posted the comment about slavery I knew where the gotcha was. However, your right. Some of your comments have made me think twice. It hasn't changed my mind yet but you never know!

Wow, didn't know church goer was a four letter word. As a matter of fact when someone asks if I am religious I tell them I'm a church goer. Guess I better get to confession and pray God doesn't strike me down.

Only answering these because you didn't see the other post: 1. Same as what the supreme court says, when the child is no longer Dependant of the mother for sustaining its own life. Think 27 weeks? I think they go from when the lungs are developed. However you could make the argument to me that life may start when the child develops a heartbeat AND has its circulatory system closed form the mothers. Which would be at 6-8 weeks. However, I will stick with the court's decision. 2. Vaginal stretching is not the only thing that can happen in a live birth. And that doesn;t even count for the severely deformed babies. Again, I support the partial birth ban if there is a medical necessity clause in it. I would then like to See our medical informations laws changed so that it is clear why the doctor is doing this procedures and others. 3. Black people like every other race shares the same DNA structure. And no, I don't believe because that fertilized egg has the same human dna' that it is human. A dead person has human DNA and if I stabbed one in the head I wouldn't be a murderer. 4. I said bad. That procedure is not the easiest of procedures. A woman could be scarred in the womb making them unable to have kids ever again. Also like most procedures theirs a small chance of death. Which is why I don't support any women who use abortions like their monthly birth control. I see you only want me to give answers that a typical pro lifer would give so you can throw back into my face. However, just because I didn't answer in that doesn't mean I didn't answer them. 2 of those questions I did answer but you didn't get me in that "gotcha corner. The other 2 you never asked me while we were on the subject. Again, only responding in respect to you and the fact you didn't read my last post before asking the questions.

It's getting worse and worse because of how the school systems are. Especially in college. More and more, it seems teachers and students work together to find loopholes instead of finding a ways for the student to improve and obey the rules. Students more then ever think cheating is fine. Alas, that's what our society is coming to. Not blaming the teacher in this specific case, but I'm sure the student's previous teacher didn't help them.

For anyone to give an opinion on what you are doing wrong you might have to go into detail what you are doing right now. How much do you eat in a day? What do you eat? Are you exercising? How much? Do you fell hungary throughout the day? NOTE: I SUGGEST POSTING YOUR QUESTION AND YOUR DIET/EXERCISING DETAILS IN A SPERATE THREAD SO PEOPLE WILL SEE IT AND RESPOND.

LOL, I didn't mean it that way But too true!

You should ask yourself that question, not me. Because not charging the woman defeats the whole notion that a human being is murdered in an abortion. Perhaps thats why they didn't. Again, thanks for sparking my interests on the subject , but please stop referring me and asking me questions. I will be coming back periodically to read the debating for it is very informational. But I won't be answering anymore, just don;t have the time lol. But this quote from an article about court cases pre Roe. Hence, the reason the mother was never convicted.

I answered, them. I was going to paste every question you asked and paste my answers but you asked alot. I notice you try to dissprove every answer I wrote. So basically if the answer isn't right for you, you consider it no answer at all. And sure your already helping, I'm always willing to listen to the other side.

I wasn't going to chime in anymore but I would just like to throw my two cents in about this. Neglect can only be charged if the "child" doesn't die in the process. If the child dies the parents would have to be charged with murder or manslaughter. Like the two articles in the other thread, one the child died and they said possible murder charges could be brought up and the other where the 4yr old didn't die , the mother could be charged with neglect. Mansluaughter, you mentioned, would be a more lenient alternative for abortions. However, manslaughter also could not happen if your theory of conception was fact and was a legal definition. Manslaughter is when a person acts on another to do harm and which death has resulted but wasn't purpsely inflicted. So, I think when Bjean says people jump too fast in creating laws he was right. Clearly, if what you say about the start of life is fact and becomes law the courts would have no other choice but life imprisonment and/or death penalty, whichever state your in. This is my last post for this thread. However I would like to thank everyone for making interesting arguements on boths sides. It has peaked my interests and I shall study up on the issue more and maybe I will switch sides... But don't hold your breath, hehe.

You are thinking about short term disability not FMLA.

Think its due to some of the fluid being left in the tubing from the port to the band.

I've head multiple reponses from veteran banders. some say they feal some restriction, some none at all. I guess is varies greatly about who did the surgery and body type. Probably not the answer you were looking for though :wink_smile:

So I will ask again. Would you convict a abortionist and/or a pregnant woman of murder? Cause by your definition you couldn't have it any other way.

I said that already. However THE LAW WAS ONLY PUT IN TO PROTECT OTHER PEOPLE IN OTHER CARS! this is off topic but whether a MINOR wanted it or not the parents have the last say and are responsible for the decision Exactly why I typed up the WLS scenario. Everyone on here thinks that WLS might be a viable option for a 15yr old and if the child and parent agree on doing it they should do it. However there would be people who think WLS is wacky and would want to arrest them. What if they had the power to put them in jail? Because the difference between the article and the license scenario is that licenses are there to protect other families where the article dealt with how families deal within each other. Theres a big difference and I ain't the best person to put thoughts on paper so maybe I ain't explaining it right?

That is an opinon that life starts when the sperm merges with the egg, not a fact. And you even said that conception means that the fertilized eggs now has a potential for life. POTENTIAL! I have a potential for being president. You can call me President Snuffy now though, thank you!

Yet, you would not throw the women in jail? If that fetus is a human being, why wouldn't the mother and doctor be charged with murder? I am really curious on why you would put such low stock on someones life. Clearly you say that a fetus as just as many rights as a born baby yet you want different punishments? :confused: Don't claim something of fact just cause there is no evidence to prove it other wise. You say life begins a conception then you would have to outlaw all brith control pills, all morning after pills. Arrest woman for drinking or smoking while pregnant and many other things.

Actually the law is was put in for OTHER PEOPLE IN OTHER CARS NOT other people in your car. However I do get your point. We force parents to buckle their kids up. So why not force parents to get medical care for their kids as well. I get it. Because parents needs to make choices for their kids. They chose prayer. Some people choose, herbal doctors, some choose witchdoctors, some choose modern medicine. We start to say one choice isn't as good as the other then where do we stop? Let me give you an example that pertains to just about everyone here: I see stories of 15 year olds that get lap bands on this site. Now I know 15 years have Good idea and can make decisions on their own. But it is the parent that needs to make the ultimate decision. Now lets say they decide to do the surgery and God forbid she dies on the operating room table. Now to me and most the folks on here, that would be tragic and we would feel remorse for the parents. However this is LBT. Any idea how many religions, secularists, people of all walks of life, think WLS is ridiculous and "wacky"? These people see the article about the 15yr old WLS patient who died and want to arrest the parents for "killing" their child over a "wacky" belief? I know WLS and a religion is two different things. But I really just trying to get you people look at it form other people's shoes.

They acted, they prayed. For some people that is enough. I just can't see telling someone else that their religion is not what I beleive and then force their children to follow a path that they believe is wrong. I just wish some of the church goers here could actually put themselves in the shoes of the parents and really think about what faith vs law vs life means to them. Of course like Gadget, most will just think of it from their perspective and think that their religion wouldn't put me in that situation. But what if your religion did put you in that situation? Sure keep saying your religion wouldn't, but WHAT IF IT DID? It's all a matter of perspective. Try to imagine what they are perceiving.

Insurance does protect both. However the law was put in place to protect other drivers on the street, why should otehr drivers pay anything or their insurance if it wasn't their fault?

No, calling someone stupid or what they do stupid is not the kind of "pressing" i mean. Government coming in and taking your children away is what "pressing" means to me.

Their beliefs didn't kill the girl. Diabetes did.

Yes I did. Almost all religions are wacky. However, unlike you folks arguing against me, I ain't trying to press my beliefs on someone else.

Exactly. You never had to make that decision. And yes, for alot of people they will never have to. But if you had to choose what would it be? Save you child's life or defy your religion?