gadgetlady

If something is legal it is always right? If it's legal but still wrong, we never have a right to say it's wrong? What about when laws change? Abortion USED to be illegal in many states. Was it OK to say it was wrong then but not now? If it becomes illegal again, can we unzip our mouths?

I didn't. I was using serial killers as an example of something that is obviously criminal -- in response to your claim that we should never decide or judge anyone for anything.

green, I am so sorry to hear this news. What is your prognosis? Treatment? (you obviously don't have to answer if you don't want to). I know you're an athiest, but I want you to know I'm praying for you.

Then there's no reason for any laws whatsoever. There are things that are right and proper for human beings to do (especially to other human beings), and there are also things that are wrong and improper. One does not have to live a perfect life to call wrong, wrong. I'm sure you wouldn't tell a serial killer that what he's doing is perfectly fine, he only has to answer for himself, and it's not your place to decide or judge him.

I once had a friend who was very proud of her untanned skin. She always slathered on suntan lotion whenever going outside and was one of the whitest people I've ever known. She was certain that she would never get skin cancer. Then a report came out that there was something in suntan lotion that was shown to cause cancer. I have a favorite saying: life causes cancer.

To my dear WestCoastFatGuy: My apologies for not bringing this information "to light" prior to your purchase of the mercury-laden bulbs. In the future I will attempt to be more proactive on matters of this nature. In the interim, may I suggest that you only listen to right-wing radio and right-wing pundits, and only visit right-wing blogs and right-wing websites. In doing so, you can be confident you will always be right. :shades_smile:

Do you mean "Glad to see you agree with their crazies" or "Glad to see you agree they're crazies"? I don't know if you're calling the people at MSNBC "crazies" or if you're agreeing with my facetious statement labeling myself a "crazy".

What, then, do you propose telling them abortion is? And what the unborn baby is? Neither is a newborn, a toddler, or an adolescent. Heck, NONE of us is complete! I've got a lot of growing left to do in my life. Government and society have a right to protect innocent life. They have a right to interfere whenever one person is contemplating killing another.

Of course, no comment that they defrauded the State of California of over $5,200,000 in two years. Well, I've never seen anything like that happen in all my years in pro-life, and I guess my answer would be I don't consider that very effective counseling. But still, it's not lying. When I had my lap-band installed, I did so with full knowledge of what was happening. No avenues were spared to inform me of exactly what was going to happen. Why is abortion any different? Why shouldn't mothers know what happens in the "procedure"? Wow! That's the first time I've heard you say that -- maybe I'm forgetting, but I really think it is. So you acknowledge now that abortion is the deliberate taking of a human life? One life should never "trump" another to the point that the other life is extinguished. Both lives can coexist and no one needs to be killed. A mother doesn't die by carrying a baby to term. A mother's life is forever changed when she kills her baby, too. Not to speak, of course, of how the life of the baby is changed! Find me any quantity of mothers who need assistance in either placing their babies with adoptive families, getting counseling or economic assistance, and I will find that help for them. I guarantee it. The resources are voluminous and often untapped. The deliberate killing of human beings is not a matter of conscience. It is unconscionable.

As I said, they are now minimally funded. Baloney. It's because of good lobbying and a lot of deception. From http://www.ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=86825: Victor Gonzalez, former vice-president for finance and administration of Planned Parenthood-Los Angeles secretly filed the suit in 2005 in a U.S. District Court in Los Angeles under the federal False Claims Act. The suit was unsealed earlier this week following a review by the U.S. attorney’s office. Gonzalez, who worked for Planned Parenthood from December of 2002 until March of 2004, alleges he was fired for bringing “illegal accounting, billing and donations practices” to the attention of his superiors. The lawsuit alleges that Planned Parenthood’s irregular billing practices began in the late 1990s and continued until 2004, when the organization persuaded the state legislature to change the law, allowing it to bill the higher rates. “The complaint documents what we believe is evidence of extensive, organized fraud by Planned Parenthood in California,” Jack Schuler, Gonzalez’s attorney, told the California Catholic Daily. Schuler elaborated saying that “A previously buried and ignored California Department of Health Services 2004 Audit, which found more than $5 million in egregious over-billing in two years by the San Diego/Riverside Planned Parenthood affiliate, is an extraordinary indictment against Planned Parenthood.” He characterized the case as “the ultimate Hollywood movie set façade of a corporation that poses as charitable while grossly over-billing government programs funded to service the needy, not the greedy.” “I would not be shocked that criminal prosecutions might follow,” he added. And from Lawsuit alleges overbilling by Planned Parenthood - Los Angeles Times A 2004 state audit of Planned Parenthood of San Diego and Riverside Counties — one of nine affiliates statewide — lends some support to Gonzalez’s allegations. The report identified more than $5.2 million in overbillings just during the 2003 fiscal year. Questions about Planned Parenthood’s billing practices were raised as early as 1997 by a state Medi-Cal official, according to letters provided to The Times by Gonzalez’s attorney. In October 1997 and January 1998, the official told Kathy Kneer, the organization’s California chief executive, her affiliates were billing for oral contraceptives incorrectly. State health officials now say, however, that they do not believe Planned Parenthood acted improperly because the organization was given contradictory guidance on billing from the state. In fact, after Planned Parenthood complained that a lower reimbursement rate could imperil its survival, the state passed a law in 2004 allowing it to continue billing as it had been all along. Former state Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson of Santa Barbara said she sponsored the legislation to remedy the problem. “I was told and persuaded that if Planned Parenthood had to reformulate the charges . . . that they wouldn’t be able to continue providing the service, that they would be losing money,” she said. “It was a question of access, absolutely.” I attended an affluent college in the 1980's. Right down the street was a Planned Parenthood. If one of the college students went in for services, they didn't have to pay. How did these women who came from extremely affluent families get free abortions, paid for by you and me? They were told by the clinic workers that even though they had health care through their parents, even though they were supported 100% by their parents through tuition, expenses, etc. at college (to the point where they didn't need part-time jobs to support themselves through school), they could just sign an affidavit that they were unemployed and therefore indigent. So here was this Planned Parenthood in a wealthy neighborhood servicing wealthy, privileged young women, encouraging these women to lie and claim to be indigent so they could receive "free" services (paid for by our tax dollars). Fraud and deception at work. You're just plain wrong. There are some places you will find graphic visual descriptions of abortions, but they generally don't take place in pregnancy counseling centers. Pro-life organizations use different tools at different times (just as pro-abortion groups do). In counseling situations, they just plain don't do this. Regardless, pictures and videos of what happens in abortion are quite simply not a lie. Isn't that an interesting turn of events. The ones who are preying are the abortion clinics: "kill your child and everything will be OK." It doesn't matter how simple it is. The point is it kills someone. Lethal injection is pretty simple too; that doesn't make it right. So is shooting someone in the head, I guess. It's always horrific for the baby. You know, we CAN love them both -- the mother and the baby. We can work to save BOTH lives. We can stop lying to women and telling them that to be successful and productive members of society, they have to kill their offspring. We can stop judging women who become pregnant out of wedlock. We can support women who are facing financial and emotional hardship from being unexpectedly pregnant. We CAN do better than we do now. Yeah, cuz that's how I spend my weekends. If convincing a pregnant woman not to abort her child is saving a life, isn't the converse true: that allowing a pregnant woman to abort is taking a life? Thank you for acknowledging that point. That's what this discussion is all about, after all. I don't care what people do with their own bodies. I only care when what they "choose" to do impedes on the life or liberty of another person.

Well, it's no longer just us right-wing crazies complaining about the mercury in fluorescent bulbs. It's gone mainstream: Shining a light on fluorescent bulbs - Environment - MSNBC.com

People are WOEFULLY ignorant about fetal development, as is evidenced by many on this thread who have posted with grand ignorance about the subject. Most mothers are quite surprised to learn that the unborn baby has a beating heart often before they even know they're pregnant. As if abortion clinics didn't have a bias? They don't make any money if the mothers coming in there don't abort. Abortion clinics are a profit-making entity and, as such, have an interest in providing as little information on the development of the unborn baby as possible. They are funded, not only by the procedures they perform, but also by our tax dollars. Pro-life clinics, on the other hand, are funded primarily by volunteers and donations; when I last volunteered in one, they were wholly funded this way. Since then, they are now receiving minimal federal assistance. Their goal is to comfort, provide information and, yes, to try to stop as many mothers as possible from ending the lives of their children. The number of dedicated personnel working in the thousands of these largely volunteer-run centers is staggering. They do not lie to mothers or try to shield the truth (and the ultrasound machine!) as abortion clinics do. While you may disagree with their goals, you certainly can't disagree with the facts they present.

It's not one facility. It's many facilities, spread all across the nation. And women coming in for free pregnancy testing don't always know or care that they don't provide abortions. This is the first step in their journey -- confirming the pregnancy. I've worked in one of these clinics and the incoming population is NOT pro-life. Of course you can't get numbers for 100% of the population if 100% of the population isn't shown the ultrasound. I don't know how else you would arrive at numbers showing whether ultrasounds change minds than discussing those who have actually had the ultrasounds. I neither told you nor wanted you to shut up. When I was outnumbered here (as I have been many times on this thread), I never felt the need to stop presenting opinion and facts. But of course it's your decision if you feel outnumbered. Catch you on another thread!

I am a big believer in informed consent. When pregnant mothers are regularly told their babies are "a blob of tissue" or "a little bit of blood", they are being lied to. Scared, pregnant mothers generally have no idea what's going on in the womb, and they're not told that the baby's heart is already beating, much less any of the other developmental things going on. They jump at the opportunity to "erase" the problem, not knowing what that "eraser" entails. It's a disgrace.

Wow - I hesitate to post after ELENATION and MrsFlipFlops profound commentaries, but I feel I must. BJean, the 90% number comes from pregnancy counseling centers, where pregnancy testing and counseling are given, but abortion and abortion referrals are not. Women who are "abortion-minded" are women who come into the clinic expecting that, if their pregnancy test is positive, they will choose to abort. Several years ago, Focus on the Family began a program called Option Ultrasound, whereby they assisted PCC's (pregnancy counseling centers) in obtaining an ultrasound machine and the training to go along with it. These PCC's have reported a 90% rate of change in the minds of mothers who were intending to abort if pregnant. After seeing their babies on the ultrasound screen, only 10% continued their plans to abort. This is actually not a surprising number at all. Abortion clinics regularly use ultrasounds to determine gestational age, to help the abortionist determine where the baby is in the womb so he can properly dismember him/her, and to determine whether any baby parts are left in the womb after the abortion is complete. It's not at all a surprise that, while in an abortion clinic, if a pregnant mother asks to see her ultrasound, she is denied the privilege. Abortionists and staff workers know what happens when a mother sees her unborn baby moving, kicking, heart beating, etc., and it's not good for business.

I was just at a retreat where the issue of offering ultrasounds to abortion-minded mothers was discussed. Turns out, when abortion-minded mothers are shown ultrasounds of their unborn babies, 90% of them change their minds and decide to carry their babies to term. NINETY PERCENT, no joke. Seeing the development of the unborn baby in the womb is a powerful thing, even in a blurry ultrasound.

Good question. And do we excuse them if the feign ignorance? I have a tremendous amount of compassion for mothers who are lied to about the development of their babies, are in a crisis situation, and who are told that abortion is the easy way out. I don't have any compassion for those who know the facts and turn their heads. When former abortionists are interviewed about why they stopped performing abortions, many of them talk about how numb they became looking at little body parts. One former abortionist talks about the irony of how he was killing babies every day at work, and he and his wife were trying to adopt. The turnaround came for him when his little adopted daughter was hit and killed by a car. He then realized that he was doing to the mothers (who were his "patients") exactly what the car driver had done to him and his wife: killing their children. He stopped doing abortions. You can find out more at: Meet the Abortion Providers

I agree it can be unhealthy to dwell on the horrific things human beings do to one another, but we also can't bury our heads in the sand -- especially when it's something that is done willfully and "legally". The reason so many women suffer emotionally and psychologically after abortion is precisely because they don't know the facts about the development of the unborn baby. There is nothing extreme about what was found behind this particular abortion clinic dumpster. It is simply evidence of what happens every day in every abortion clinic in America. It is an example of bad behavior done by bad people, but it is neither extreme nor unusual. It is reality.

It's not surprising this thread continues, especially with all of the news recently. In addition to the VP of Marketing and Development in Idaho being "excited" about accepting a racially-motivated donation to target black babies for abortion because (according to the donor) "the less black kids out there the better" (see my previous post with a YouTube link), we now have new news. In a dumpster behind a Lathrum, Michigan abortion facility were found medical records, bio-hazardous materials, and intact parts of aborted babies. http://www.crosswalk.com/news/11570761/ is a news link (there are many others available), http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=on_aCpgBsbA for a link to watch the video of what was found. If you don't believe unborn babies are formed at 6 weeks in the womb, watch the video. I was shaking an crying as I was watching it, begging God for forgiveness of what we do to the littlest ones in our care.

I just received an update from HSLDA: State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell comes to the defense of homeschool families. "The California Department of Education policy will not change in any way as a result of this ruling. Parents still have the right to homeschool in this state," he said. After the Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District in Los Angeles ruled on February 28 that parents had to be credentialed teachers to educate their own children the statement from O'Connell is encouraging news for the homeschool community. "O'Connell has it right," said Michael Farris, Chairman of HSLDA. "But the court decision must still be overturned before homeschool freedom can be restored in California." The Court of Appeal ruling shocked the homeschool community because in one sweeping decision it effectively outlawed homeschooling. "We hope the statement from O'Connell puts the brakes on any enforcement action," said Farris. HSLDA will be pursuing several legal options, including seeking review by the California Supreme Court and petitioning the same court to depublish the opinion in order to return California to being a state where a family can legally homeschool in California without fear. "We have just started the legal battle to restore homeschool freedom in California," said Farris.

Yup, April 18th. I'm going to be out of town when it is released, so I hope I have the time to see it. I hope it gets a TON of press!

There are many sources quoted at the HSLDA website, and the information from the page about academic statistics (HSLDA | Academic Statistics on Homeschooling) is varied. Upon cursory review, I don't find any references in this article to Fraser at all. For example: In Pennsylvania, 171 homeschooled students took the CTBS standardized achievement test. The tests were all administered in group settings by Pennsylvania certified teachers. The middle reading score was the 89th percentile and the middle math score was the 72nd percentile. The middle science score was the 87th percentile and the middle social studies score was the 81st percentile. A survey conducted of all these homeschool families who participated in this testing found that the average student spent only 16 hours per week in formal schooling (i.e., structured lessons that were preplanned by either the parent or a provider of educational materials). In West Virginia, over 400 hundred homeschool students, grades K-12, were tested with the Stanford Achievement test at the end of the 1989-90 school year. The Psychological Corporation scored the children together as one school. The results found that the typical homeschooled students in eight of these grade levels scored in the "somewhat above average" range (61st to 73rd average percentile), compared to the performance of students in the same grade from across the country. Two grade levels scored in the "above average" range (80th to 85th average percentile) and three grade levels scored in the "about average range" (54th to 59th average percentile). In Washington state, a survey of the standardized test results of 2,018 homeschooled students over a period of three years found that the median cell each year varied from the 65th percentile to the 68th percentile on national norms. The Washington Home School Research Project concluded that "as a group, these homeschoolers are doing well." Statistics also demonstrate that homeschoolers tend to score above the national average on both their SAT and ACT scores. For example, the 2,219 students reporting their homeschool status on the SAT in 1999 scored an average of 1083 (verbal 548, math 535), 67 points above the national average of 1016. In 2004 the 7,858 homeschool students taking the ACT scored an average of 22.6, compared to the national average of 20.9. According to the 1998 ACT High School Profile Report, 2,610 graduating homeschoolers took the ACT and scored an average of 22.8 out of a possible 36 points. This score is slightly higher that the 1997 report released on the results of 1,926 homeschool graduates and founding homeschoolers maintained the average of 22.5. This is higher than the national average, which was 21.0 in both 1997 and 1998. These are standardized test results, and while they are being reported by a homeschool organization, they are not being administered by one. Furthermore, it is very unlikely you'll find an institutionalized, public school system touting the benefits of homeschooling. Nevertheless, the following is noted: II. State Department of Education Statistics on Homeschoolers Several state departments of education or local school districts have also gathered statistics on the academic progress of homeschooled children. Tennessee In the spring of 1987, the Tennessee Department of Education found that homeschooled children in 2nd grade, on the average, scored in the 93rd percentile while their public school counterparts, on the average, scored in the 62nd percentile on the Stanford Achievement Test. Homeschool children in third grade scored, on the average, in the 90th percentile in reading on another standardized test, and the public school students scored in the 78 percentile. In math, the third grade homeschooled children scored, on the average, in the 87th percentile, while their public school counterparts scored in the 80th percentile. In eighth grade, the homeschooled students scored, on the average, in the 87th percentile in reading and in 71st percentile in math while their public school counterparts scored in the 75th percentile in reading and the 69th percentile in math. Alaska and Oregon Similarly, in 1986, the State Department of Education in Alaska which had surveyed homeschooled children's test results every other year since 1981, found homeschooled children to be scoring approximately 16 percentage points higher, on the average, than the children of the same grades in conventional schools. In Oregon, the State Department of Education compiled test score statistics for 1,658 homeschooled children in 1988 and found that 51 percent of the children scored above the 71st percentile and 73 percent scored above the 51st percentile. North Carolina In North Carolina, the Division of Non-Public Education compiled test results of 2,144 homeschool students in grades K-12. Of the 1,061 homeschool students taking the California Achievement Test, they scored, on the average, at the 73rd percentile on the total battery of tests: 80th percentile in reading, 72nd percentile in language, and the 71st percentile in math. The 755 homeschool students who took the Iowa Test of Basic Skills scored at the 80th percentile in the total battery of tests: 81st percentile in reading, 77th percentile in language, and 77th percentile in math. The remaining students who took the Stanford scored, on the average, in the 73rd percentile in the whole battery. Arkansas In Arkansas, for the 1987-88 school term, homeschool children, on the average, scored in 75% on the Metropolitan Achievement Test 6. They out-scored public school children in every subject (Reading, Math, Language, Science, and Social Studies) and at every grade level. For example, at the 10th grade level public school children scored an average of 53rd percentile in social studies, while homeschool children scored at the 73rd percentile. In science, an area in which homeschoolers are often criticized for lack of facilities, the homeschoolers scored, on the average, 85th percentile in fourth grade, 73rd percentile in seventh grade, and 65th percentile in tenth grade. The public school students, on the other hand, scored much lower in science: 66th percentile in fourth grade, 62nd percentile in seventh, and 53rd percentile in tenth. Arizona According to the Arizona State Department of Education, 1,123 homeschooled children in grades 1-9, on the average, scored above grade level in reading, language arts, and math on standardized tests for the 1988-89 school year. Four grades tested were a full grade level ahead. Nebraska In Nebraska, out of 259 homeschooled children who returned to public or non-public schools, 134 of them were automatically placed in their grade level according to their age without testing. Of the remaining who were given entrance tests, 33 were above grade level, 43 were at grade level, and 29 were below grade level. Approximately 88 percent of the returning students were at or above grade level after being homeschooled for a period of time. This survey was the result of the responses of 429 accredited schools. III. Local School District Statistics on Homeschooling 1. In 1988, 30 homeschooled children in Albuquerque, New Mexico, participated in the state-mandated testing program (Comprehensive Test of Basic Skills) and scored on the average in the 83rd percentile for 3rd grade, the 85th percentile for 5th grade, and the 89th percentile for 8th grade. This group of homeschoolers scored 20 to 25 percentile points higher than the local public school students taking the CTBS in 1987. 2. In a 1980 study in Los Angeles, homeschooled students scored higher on standardized tests than children in the Los Angeles public schools. 3. In South Carolina, the Greenville County School District stated, "Kids taught at home last year outscored those in public schools on basic skills tests." In that county, 57 out of 61 homeschooled students "met or exceeded the state's minimum performance standard on the reading test" of the Comprehensive Test of Basic Skills. The homeschool students' passing rate was 93.4 while the public school counterparts passing rate was 83.9 percent. Furthermore, in math, the homeschooled students passing rate was 87.9 percent compared to the public school students' passing rate of 82.1 percent. 4. In Nevada, according to Washoe County School District's data, homeschooled students scored higher than their public school counterparts in first through seventh grade. All children were tested with the Stanford Achievement Test, and homeschoolers consistently scored higher in reading, vocabulary, reading comprehension, math concepts, math comprehension, math and math concepts and application. The most extreme gap between the public school children and the homeschooled children was in the area of vocabulary. For example, fourth graders in public school scored in the 49th percentile while the homeschooled fourth graders scored in the 80th percentile.

Everything I've ever read or known about him identifes himself as the Father of Modern (or Progressive) Education. I know you won't agree with the philosophy of the article, but here's one example: John Dewey: the father of progressive education and Dewey

No, sorry. As I said, someone sent it to me. I will try to find it later tonight when I'm at a more solid internet link (I'm on the road right now). John Dewey was the one who pushed like crazy to get public education established in the US. I wouldn't consider this a stretch at all.

Try here: HSLDA | Home School Research We have come to a point where colleges and universities are now recruiting homeschoolers because they do so well, as are employers. From http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/000010/200410250.asp: In 1997, a study of 5,402 homeschool students from 1,657 families was released. It was entitled, "Strengths of Their Own: Home Schoolers Across America." The study demonstrated that homeschoolers, on the average, out-performed their counterparts in the public schools by 30 to 37 percentile points in all subjects. A significant finding when analyzing the data for 8th graders was the evidence that homeschoolers who are homeschooled two or more years score substantially higher than students who have been homeschooled one year or less. The new homeschoolers were scoring on the average in the 59th percentile compared to students homeschooled the last two or more years who scored between 86th and 92nd percentile. This was confirmed in another study by Dr. Lawrence Rudner of 20,760 homeschooled students which found the homeschoolers who have homeschooled all their school aged years had the highest academic achievement. This was especially apparent in the higher grades. In a study released by the National Center for Home Education on November 10, 1994. According to these standardized test results provided by the Riverside Publishing Company of 16,311 homeschoolers from all 50 states K-12, the nationwide average for homeschool students is at the 77th percentile of the basic battery of the Iowa Test of Basic Skills. In reading, the homeschoolers' nationwide grand mean is the 79th percentile. This means, of course, that the homeschool students perform better in reading than 79 percent of the same population on whom the test is normed. In the area of language arts and math, the typical homeschooler scored in the 73rd percentile. These 16,311 homeschool students' scores were not self-selected by parents or anyone else. They represent all the homeschoolers whose tests were scored through the Riverside Publishing Company. It is important to note that this summary of homeschool achievement test scores demonstrates that 54.7% of the students in grades K-12 are achieving individual scores in the top quarter of the population of students in the United States. This figure is more than double the number of conventional school students who score in the top quarter. There is actually so much good information and statistics in this article that I couldn't possibly post it all here for fear of getting kicked off of LBT for using up too much space :blushing:. I strongly suggest visiting the website and reading it all.