BJean

IMHO there are people who get into politics with noble intentions, but when they get involved in any kind of race to win an election, too many palms have to be crossed and too many promises are made that don't have the best interests of the masses in mind. Some politicians are worse than others though, there's no doubt about that. People can win a race without compromising every facet of their moral character but others never had any moral character from the start.

As a matter of fact Jack, I think you are absolutely right. I do not believe that the government should fund abortions. I think that funding can be handled by the private sector. Although you do run the risk of only financially stable individuals having the choice. And we all know what the results of that could be. As I've said many times, it is a very complex issue. I appreciate Wheetsin's and Jack's posts addressing that part of the issue.

Anyone besides me think David A. sounds a bit like R Kelly? (I don't even know if I'm spelling his name right.) Maybe his dad is trying to make him a "nice" R Kelly instead of a shady R Kelly. I agree, I think we should give all of them a break. I believe that they are all incredibly talented. I think their voices are better under pressure than many of the contestants in earlier shows. But they take such a beating from the judges and mostly come from backgrounds that are performance limited, so to get up on that huge stage in L.A., in front of a good sized audience and very critical judges has to be a real punch in the gut. On the other hand, they knew what they were getting into and they just have to suck it up and do their best. Their ability to do that and get millions of viewers voting for them is what will give them a leg up and what separates them from the other young people who are trying to make it in the music business. If David Archuleta wins, I hope he doesn't wind up like Britney Spears in 4 or 5 years when he gets the gumption to stand up to his stage father.

I totally agree!!! If would be fun if they chose ONE celebrity each season - someone whose songs are popular today. But to put them all in one category, like country with Dolly, just doesn't do them any favors. And I love Dolly. But her songs are very unique and very country. Neil Diamond's style is very unique too and I didn't think many of them sounded very good doing his either. Mariah Carey's stuff sounded better on all of them. Poor Archuleta. To a mom like me, he sounds like he's trying to sing while he has the croup. If he has asthma that's sad, but it is distracting to hear him sound like he is having to work so hard at taking air in. I think he'll be so much better when he gets a few more years on him and has more self confidence. Of course when you have everybody under the sun giving you advice, it takes a lot to not get discouraged. He must have a lot of spunk.

Ohmigosh yes, it definitely has gotten overwhelming at times. I appreciate the fact that you're willing to post and share your feelings and even the fact that you've been through it. If I remember correctly I think at one point you got bombarded when you talked about it. Which was very, very sad and disturbing. Tell your mom she has a friend in her corner anytime she needs backup.

luluc I'm not sure if you're thinking I'm a 70 something Floridian or that your mom is. I used to live in Florida but I'm not 70 (or even close to that, of course everything is relative and I'm probably closer to it than you are.) I've lived all over the country although I'm currently doing a stint in Texas. Believe me it is no fun pissing people off. Ask your mom. I'm sure she doesn't enjoy upsetting people any more than I do. But maybe your mom remembers what it was like when abortion was against the law. That'll make you pretty passionate. In theory it sounds like a good idea to outlaw something that has so many negatives attached to it, but when you see what it really does to women, you know that things just aren't black and white in this world no matter how much we wish they were. Whether we like it or not or believe in it or not, sometimes people need that kind of help. I believe that banning abortion does more harm than good. That may piss people off and I know that people disagree, but I believe it is true and that has been what I have observed throughout my long life (although I really am NOT 70!) All of the counter punches and arguments won't change what my experience and observations and friendships and work have taught me on this subject. I am more than happy to see this thread die, but as long as there are people who insist that a law should be passed that will take away a woman's choice regarding abortion, I'll keep posting and insisting that the decision must be in kept the hands of the people involved, not the government.

Only a size 3 font? I always use little bitty fonts at the office and to me it looked like at least a 50. I use a lot of punctuation marks too. No harm, no foul. I did think you were really mad and I hope I was wrong. Glad we cleared the air - at least I hope we did.

luluc glad you clarified that. (Btw, I thought it would be dead after last night too. I was hoping...) I do not believe that it is as simple as defining when life begins. It is much more complicated than that, even though many people believe that when life begins only Mother Nature or God should be in control of what happens. I agree with you about not being judge and jury over others. I would never presume to try to gain control over a woman's womb and inflict my beliefs on her. As I have said many times, ad nausem in fact, there are many reasons, more than we can come up with here, that women need to be able to make the choice of whether to have a child. One law forcing all women to have all babies is not the answer to this question. As I have also said, counseling, male support, society's understanding and people not judging others would be a good ways to approach the problem of unwanted pregnancies. But there are situations when medical abortions are warranted and that decision should not be determined by you and me for everyone else.

MissyGordon what I said was that I believe that sometimes anti-choice posters are harsh. I went on to say that anti-choice posters often feel that pro-choice people are being harsh. Your subsequent post proves the point I was trying to make. I didn't know what else to say. I do believe that we should probably try to let it roll off our backs and consider the reasons why we sound harsh to each other, instead of getting all het up and using size 50 fonts with numerous exclamation marks or question marks, which do seem to be coming from some rage. As I said, not everyone agrees with me. Do whatever makes you feel better. That's what I try to do. Elenation that was a great post. Thank you very much. You stated it very well. It's always great to feel like we're on the same page on these threads. That's something at least, right?

Elenation that's a good point. I agree. But I do think it makes sense to keep it at least a little logical if we can. Otherwise it can be so far out that it appears to be used just to enrage the opposition, not really for purposes of true debate. Both sides have to understand when the opposition goes too far and suggests extreme and illogical scenarios, and that we need to try very hard to take them for what they are. By the same token, we should all understand that we are going to get called on it if we choose to go to such extremes. Of course that's my left sided thinking talking and I realize that many people disagree with me on this. Which btw, is perfectly acceptible and okay with me. For what that's worth. :smile2:

This is a little dated, but well..... Duh.

georgia I completely agree about Brooke. She's so uncomfortable without the piano or guitar that it makes me very nervous for her. I thought her piano playing last night with her second song was a very good complement to her performance. I also agree with Indiogirl that Brooke can't win. I do think she probably has a nice career ahead of her. Afterall, Carole King is pretty much over the hill and gone isn't she? At least I never hear much about her anymore. So there's room for another Carole King. It would be great if Brooke could write songs as well as Carole. Man Carole King has a history of writing good tunes that goes back to the late '50s I think.

Sucked back in... dang. I wholeheartedly disagree with the idea that making abortion illegal is empowering to women. I do agree that the men sperm doners should take the reponsibility for their actions instead of just the women having all of the responsibility (as in so many cases). But I do not believe that men should be making choices for women about their pregnancies, no matter what the circumstances. How one can see that as empowering to women I'll never understand. laurend and Tommy, I have a really difficult time understanding the logic sometimes of the anti-choice side of this debate too. Pro-choice people are accused of being harsh, but I believe that anti-choice people are often very harsh. It obviously depends upon your beliefs and the framework of your ideas on this issue. We need to be more tolerant on both sides because we all have feelings and beliefs and we need to be able to state them without being accused of harshness just because we disagree with each other. I knew I was correct in not using names when I disagreed with the content of posts, but I allowed myself to be goaded into a cat fight. Not pretty and I apologize to all the readers. :smile2:

I thought Jason Castro's songs were a tiny bit weak in a few places but otherwise I really liked the tone of his voice and I liked him better last night than ever before. Go figure. I think Syesha should get on with her Broadway/movie career. I think I could really enjoy her in a venue like that, but on American Idol I can hardly stand her. I loved her dress but what was with the bare feet? I continue to be very impressed with David Cook. I think his personality reflects a shy, little bit introverted guy. I think that it comes across sometimes as being glib or maybe a little haughty. But he has a hard time responding to spontaneous questions and if you really look pay close attention, you can tell he's grateful and thrilled with the judges and audience's response to him. I put my money on David Cook. Boy was Archuleta's performance predictable. I heard an R Kelly song the other day and I finally realized who Archuleta reminds me of. R Kelly's song was amazingly similar in style and tone to Archuleta. In fact, I thought it might be Archuleta at first. Glad I could see on the read out in the car that it was R Kelly performing. I really think that some of Paula's stuff is planned for shock value. It gets her in the news everytime and consequently American Idol gets mentioned too. If it had been real, I don't think Simon would have handled it the way he did. I also don't think they would have let her go on for so long in her critique of Jason's "two" songs. Of course she's a real flake, so I could definitely be wrong. Brooke's second song was like the original, pre stage and Simon fright, Brooke. It finally made me remember why I liked her so much in the beginning. Who's going off tonight? I know it could be Jason Castro, but he has a really strong fan base. I'm hoping it is Syesha because I want to see the others perform the Idol stuff more. How 'bout ya'll?

Sorry Susan. I posted mine before I read yours. Frankly if I thought it would lock this thread down if I insulted someone big time, I'd probably do it. :blushing: Seriously, you are absolutely right. This has become personal and that is downright ridiculous. I was trying my best to keep the peace, but I have found that it is impossible. Thanks for intervening, Susan. It's been a stupid day for all of us here on this thread. I promise to go away.

You, of all people, know better than that. If I wanted to find stuff to backup my statements, I could certainly do that. I know you'll find this hard to believe, but pages of imported data and links to blogs and web addresses just are not important to me at LBT. That's one reason, although not the only reason, that I have no interest in reading yours. Hey I already said you won. Why are you still trying to insult me? Just because you can, right? :blushing:

You won. You have posted the highest number of links to more conservative right wing internet sources than anyone else. Very impressive. I couldn't begin to compete with you on link ups so you win. Keep up the miraculous and dazzling work that you do here. I know I am impressed with the sheer volume of stuff that you dig up. I am sure everyone else is too. You'll forgive me if I don't share your love for cutting, pasting and linking, won't you?

Hon, you link enough for the both of us. And I rest my case because I can. I'm once again nauseous after reading this thread today.

Once again, I rest my case.

Did you read AND understand what you posted? The conclusion can just as easily read: women who have mental health problems are more prone to seek abortions. There is no proof that abortion causes women to become suicidal and it is just as plausible that women who were mentally unstable before their abortions are the women who were cited in that study who they've deemed mentally unstable after their abortions. And another conclusion could be claimed that abortion doesn't cure mental instability. This is another example of many cases where people skew the results of studies to suit their particular beliefs. Until all women who choose abortion are included in a study like that, there is no way that it can be determined that the women who were unstable after an abortion were perfectly stable before an abortion and therefore they cannot state that abortion causes women to become mentally unstable. For years dieticians claimed that avocados should be avoided because they contain so much fat. Yes they do contain a lot of fat. But more studies were done and it turned out that it is a good, natural fat that is deemed healthy today. Faulty thinking has caused us to be very slow in understanding diet and health. We should not be so quick to read a study, especially one done by a biased group of people or by a biased person seeking to prove their beliefs, and accept conclusions based on that study.

Your first post, if the stats were correct, essentially backs up my point. Thanks. Your second post is laughable - at best.

Well there's at least one other choice that you always seem to conveniently ignore: that we can have a live mother or a dead mother. If a woman can't have a baby, and abortion is not an option, women have historically chosen to either try to privately terminate the pregnancy themselves and/or they commit suicide and kill themselves. Saying that all they have to do is give the baby up for adoption if they don't want a baby is down playing the reality of what it means to become pregnant and birth a child. How any woman can give a child up for adoption is almost beyond my comprehension, but I won't put someone down who chooses it as an option.

Oh my goodness. You are so wrong on so many counts. I have to leave my computer but I want to say something - I have never, ever, ever, said that aborting babies after they are viable is right. I have never, ever, ever, said that seeing the horrendous photos that you provide links to doesn't bother me. It does bother me. And it does make me think less of you. I don't doubt that there are absolutely no lines that you will not cross in order to make people believe that women should never have the right to make their own choices when it comes to abortion. Just because I do believe that women have that right and I do believe that we should not make abortion illegal, does not mean that I am an insensitive, uncaring person. In fact, I believe that it indicates that I am a VERY caring and sensitive person. For someone (someone like you in fact, since you like for me to single you out) to say that all women should be forced to have unwanted babies, no matter what, I believe makes them (YOU) the insensitive one. I know, you think that because you believe that a fertilized egg, a wee tiny bit of a piece of tissue has every right to life, regardless of the circumstances of the mother, the health of the tissue itself, or anything else, to me offers up proof that you the insensitive one.

You're the one who is sounding insensitive. In fact, I'm so sensitive, I can no longer stand this exchange with you. You're grossing me out. Go for it. I'm sure you're winning friends and influencing people. Or um, maybe not.

When our children are in utero, we do in fact own them. You don't see the state intervening in pregnancies if we don't don't eat well or if we drink or if we smoke crack cocaine. You do see the state making an effort to educate pregnant women about the dangers of not eating properly, or smoking or drinking. That's what we should do with women who are impregnated against their wishes. We should educate them about the healthy ways that they can deal with the pregnancy. No body should be forced to have babies against their wishes. Nobody should be forced to abort if they don't wish to abort, even if they are carrying a cocaine addicted, extremely deformed or retarded baby. (Our grandchildren had no such exposure to drugs - I'm sure you'll be assuming that they were from what you're reading into my posts.) As for your remark, "it appears that you would have preferred they kill your grandchildren..." you should be ashamed to imply that. There was nothing in what I said that would indicate I would have preferred any such thing. In fact, I preferred that they make their own decisions - I had no desire or reason to force my preferences on them one way or another. I am thankful that they made the decision that they made - to not listen to the medical profession and to go through the procedures that they did that saved the babies. My DIL had serial amniocentises, constant monitoring through vaginal ultrasounds, and a surgery done by the one doctor in the U.S. who is qualified to do that kind of life saving surgery. Please don't make light of or degrade our experience with your own bias.