Wheetsin

I think it's possible for people to support the right to choose 100%, and still be morally opposed to abortion. In fact, I think (but could be wrong) that Carlene has shared that position a few times. And I think Laurend has also said she is not "pro" people running around having abortions willy nilly. And I know a LOT of people IRL who support abortion "if...". But sometimes you just can't have ifs. When you're dealing with medicine, there's always going to be an unprecedented case, or an anomoly. Or a mistake. I would guess that in most cases (and probably in the majority of cases), the right to choose and keep legislation away from your uterus overrides public moral objection to the fact that there's a fetus/baby involved. Meaning - while someone would never have an abortion themselves, nor would they ever want to prevent someone else from having the choice. I've not had an abortion, but I did have a close call with pregnancy once. While on the pill and using a spermicide. It ended up being for other reasons, but my period was over two months last. And honestly, I did start to have thoughts like, "I wonder if there is anywhere around here that performs abortions..." So I know that it's not a decision that - in most cases - is made lightly. I know that the fear that resided in the back of my head was -- perhaps I wouldn't regret it now, but what about 10 years down the road? What it something changed and I decided I wanted to have kids, but was then unable to for some reason? Etc. I don't know what's required to have an abortion - maybe just the cost. But I would hope that, at the very least, some steps are taken to educate - regardless of the "why". I mean - hell, I had to go through a psychologist to get my band...

Oh yeah, I can't edit, so "imo" to your heart's content.

Sexuality is nature. The idea that it's something to be changed or hidden is nurture. Poor nurture. Laurend - my husband and I had that exact conversation Monday or Tuesday on our way to work (our buildings are just a few minutes apart so we ride together). I was drawing the parallel that at one time, people would not have believed that interracial relationships would be an everyday sight -- and how long will it take before our descendents say the same thing about same sex relationships, and how stupid and ignorant will we look to them, for even daring to protest it... because at some point, the mere idea of trying to deny equal rights based on sexual orientation will be unfathomable (and not just disgusting, like it is today).

Just throwing a question out there. If clinical abortions were outlawed, do you guys think we'd see a decrease in the number of abortions that occur? (Let's say that hypothetically we could account for all abortions, legal and not - so the possibility that they could occur untracked is removed). Or do you think we'd just see a decrease in abortions done in controlled and reasonably safe medical surroundings, vs. the hanger in a bathtub, chop shop in someone's basement, or women who repeatedly bang themselves against the backs of chairs?

To me, a choice is a choice. I don't think we can say "It's ok if..." Either it's allowable, or it isn't. In that case, you will always have people who use it for its "intended" purpose (e.g. unintentional, medical considerations, etc.) versus "unintended" (e.g. leisure pregnancy control, nothing better to do on Friday afternoon, whatever). By advocating for the right to choose, you're advocating for the right to choose to do it for any reason. I *hope* (think) most people who advocate for a woman's choice understand that. Personally, I don't care why someone is having an abortion. My greatest hope would be that they at least make an educated decision - understand what it does to the body, understand the emotional consequences they may have and take as many precautions as possible, etc. But whether someone wants the abortion because they were raped or because they were too lazy to take their pill doesn't make one iota of difference to me. It's about having the choice and domain - not about the motivators or surrounding consequences.

I'd think not, or else people like Yao Ming would be dragging it behind them like an overstuffed duffel bag.

This has been happening for a few days. It's something with the system, but I don't know what. A year or so ago we had the same issue. Just be patient with us, and umm... don't make any typing mistakes or have any additional thoughts that would require editing. (I've become the queen of the 2nd post replacement - posting a follow up in lieu of being able to edit)

Truly I'd think it's Water. There are countless culprits for Fluid retention. We look at the obvious ones like sodium intake and dehydration, but the weather, activity level, well - anything, really - can make our bodies become little greedy sponges. I do experience it. In the last 3 weeks, while maintaing a constant clothing size, my weight has ranged from 247 to 262. There's just no way, you know?

Carlene, why liquids & mushies? Is this a self-prescribed "back to basics" campaign, or are you having problems with your band?

My company approved me and my BMI was somewhere over 50... between 52 and 56 somewhere. I guess I should feel even luckier! Honest? I would never advocate it for long term results, but if you want to drop weight fast, follow the induction phase of the Atkins diet. It's truly not something you want to live with (trust me, I did it for well over a year, and had to live with the consequences), but chances are you will lose weight and lose it quickly. Weight, not fat. I should clarify - you will lose fat, eventually. But in the beginning when your ketosis kicks in, you will be losing mostly Fluid. It's not uncommon for people to lose 10+ lbs in their first week.

Restriction is when the band is able to "restrict" the passage of what we swallow into the stomach. I may give slightly different advice, but I say wholeheartedly - if you're truly hungry, then eat. Just be mindful of what you eat, and always always bpay attention to how it's feeling and what your band is telling you, so to speak. However: Stopping eating before you feel full is a good thing. When people ask me for tips or advice, I always tell them to focus on no longer hungry instead of full. There's a lot more food quantity between those two sensations that what you might think.

Your pain was probably caused by the changing of gas volume in your body, especially if gas post-op was an issue for you. Planes are pressurized but the pressurization changes with ascent and descent, and is not going to be true to your native ground pressure. I believe most planes are pressurized to the equivalent of 10,000 feet (of course this varies as the plane moves). As you ascend the cabin pressure decreases, and as pressure decreases, things - including gas - expand. That can lead to some ouchies.

My goal weight is two things. For one, it's when I was last happy with myself and did not have weight on the mind. It's also the high end of the 25 BMI threshold (181 would put me at a BMI of 26).

Again, putting words in my mouth. I can see his point does not = I agree with his point. My mother is a Catholic and I can see why she has the beliefs she does, but that doesn't mean I agree with them or share them. My husband is from another country and has certain beliefs about American life, but although I can see why he has them, it doesn't mean I share them. Get the difference?

You're assuming I was referring to your comment on slavery. That is incorrect. I knew what parallel you were trying to draw. I've posted references to it myself. I was referring to things like "That's awesome!", and "There are even some <gasp> athiest pro-lifers."

No, you're putting words in my mouth. I said I can see his point, not that I agree with it.

Erosion is when the band erodes into the tissue. Slipping is when the band becomes mispositioned (other complications can be involved too).

I think you ODed on sarcasm pills tonight. We don't have a standard definition for when life begins. You seemed to think that would reside in science, but it varies by science and undoubtedly within the individual practitioners. Like everything else. Point remains - the two stances Laurend mentioned don't require the other to be disingenious.

I can see his point.

I'm getting that smiley face overload thing when I try to edit, so I'll just add - sorry for the partial post that was up for a bit. I mistyped, and ended up triggering the keyboard shortcuts to post a message when I was only one or two sentences into my response.

Let's see. Metabolic science = a single moment marking human life doesn't exist. Modernist metabolic science = there isn't a single point because it's a continuous process, and even things quoted as the moment life begins (e.g. "conception" isn't an exact moment, it is a process that takes about 24 hours, during which a lot of different things happen, and another 24 hours before zygote is achieved). Genetic science = the moment that a genetic being exists that did not exist before (I believe this would be zygotal diploid, problem being that they often cite gentic uniqueness, but gentic uniqueness isn't a requirement of life). Embryological science: Life begins at gastrulation (about 3 - 4 weeks into the pregnancy). Neuroscience: When the fetus has a recognizable EEG. Modernist neuroscience: Expands that to say when the fetus has an EEG consistent with a mature brain. Ecological science: WHen the fetus can exist separately from the environment it depends on for development.

Some people believe that life begins at conception. Some people do not. That does not imply disingenuity on behalf of either party.

Hence gays are a threat to the American family. Because, you know, we'd much rather see married people stay together and be miserable, than divorce and be happy, and you gays know divorce is a homosexual institution... 4 years in "gay" is like a lifetime in "hetero"...

Basing it off of the last time I was comfortable with how I looked, and understanding that weight this time around may not look like that weight before I got fat, because of where the fat has accumulated, skin being stretched, etc. I have a goal goal, which reflects the original number, and a 20 lb flex because I know it may take a little more or less.

Sunta - I agree, no surprise. It's funny. Back in college the exact same example was an a-ha for me, in a course I was taking called "Appreciation and Tolerance for Diversity." Also was an inventory we were asked to do at a store, to make a determination on whether or not the store would adequately serve the needs of X other ethnicity. We had to look at things like - the colors of clothing and what skin tones they were complimentary to, the type of hair and skin care products - things as "trivial" as what types of barettes were stocked, what the shampoo directions were, etc. You know, those hippy free thought classes all of us liberal arts people like to take. (That's entirely my own tongue in my cheek). It was not only an eye opener, it made me very sad... to be able to see the problems that were invisible before, for my own lack of information and understanding.