BJean

GREAT post Cleo's!!

I like the guy who said it's too bad we can't sit down and discuss the pros and cons. As the last lady spoke, it was obvious that the Republicans have succeeded with some people, in planting fear and distrust. There have always been conflicts with political issues in this country but the Republicans and right wing have made it impossible to have an intelligent dialogue that might result in people learning something and making an informed decision. They are operating, as usual, on misinformation, lies and fear mongering. When you're debating if you can get away with this behavior, you don't need the truth on your side. You don't need to have any serious merits in your arguments. All you need is to spout buzz words and fear and it's enough to convince a lot of Americans. I really wish we were better people than this.

Nice. Real nice.

Cleo's: "Imagine if all education was for profit private education (a goal of the neocons, by the way) - then only the rich could afford to send their kids to school. The poor would be shut out. But we have access to free public education for all. That's the way healthcare should be." One reason private schools are fine with the neocons is because it will keep those poor people in their place - doing the neocons laundry, polishing their shoes, picking up their trash, planting and harvesting their crops, etc. 8 years of the Bush administration - which included a Republican dominated congress - has brought this country into a phase where the rich has been getting richer and the poor poorer and the middle class shrinking. Now we need to get things back on track for most Americans or we're going to end up like Mexico with just two classes, the very rich and the very poor. Have you been watching what's going on down there? If people keep supporting policies that the Bush administration got going or strengthened, then we will keep getting the results that brought us to the brink. How stupid, how very very stupid, is that? We need changes all the way around. Not to make this a socialist country, but to make this a country where everyone gets a fair shake. That's what our founders worked for and that's what we Americans have been promised by our Constitution and Bylaws. And it's also what people who flee to this country have been promised. At least the ones who come here legally. I am thoroughly embarrassed by the greed displayed by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Mr. Williams, quoted above. Wanna bet how wealthy Mr. Williams is? I don't know but I'll be willing to bet on it.

Good to hear from you Coloradobanding! It is also great to see that you have found your "sweet spot"! I hope you continue to do well with the band and you reach the goal you've set for yourself!

YES!!! There are so many reasons why sex education in schools is vital, but if right wing extremists want fewer abortions they should be in support of it not against it. Great point, Leigha.

Thanks for your post Leigha. You made the point much more convincingly than I. But I am very passionate about this issue and just can't keep from ranting from time to time. Btw, not that it means much, but I was a virgin when I got married. I got married at 19, so it's not as if I waited until I was 30. But I was very involved in my church and firmly believed that it was a nearly unforgivable sin to have sex before marriage. That is exactly why I got married so early. Biological urges made my decision for me. So I was married to the totally wrong guy and it lasted for 4 very long, very desperate, very unhappy years. He was a staunch Baptist too and his sexual education was non-existent. What a calamity! And we were both convinced by the teachings of the church that marriage was forever. Hence the very long, horrible 4 years. I left that marriage relieved but broken, with feelings of very low self-esteem and failure. And I had a one year old baby to take care of as a single parent. Ignorance is not bliss!

I've been amazed and mystified over the years to learn how many of my mother's contemporaries "had" to get married. We didn't invent the term "shotgun weddings" it was used long before I was born. I didn't mean to insult you, patty. Tell me, how did you get your sexual education? How did you find out about sexually transmitted diseases? How did you learn everything there is to know about contraceptives? And at what age did you teach your children everything so that they could be prepared to take care of themselves? My mother gave me some brochures from the health department. She was embarrassed to discuss sex or contraceptives or veneral disease. She didn't tell us about condoms or birth control pills or foam or any other way to protect ourselves from unwanted pregnancy. It was just too embarrassing for her. And I was very close to my mother. She was a well-educated woman. She was a perfect mother in every other area of parenting. And no one I have ever known got a good sexual education from their parents. People I know who thought abstinence was the way to handle the topic of sex, taught them just that - abstinence before marriage. Period. They might tell their kids about the horrors of disease or pregnancy to scare them, but as for real meaningful sex ed, forget it. That's why so many kids of parents who teach abstinence only still have sex, still become pregnant, still get veneral diseases. If teaching abstinence only worked, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Actually patty, the question should not have been why you put single quotes around the word repercussions, but why you put that word in quotes at all. I'm just curious. I don't understand what you were trying to tell me.

Yeah Cleo's, that and comprehensive sex education. If parents actually taught their children about anatomy, physiology and reproduction as well as sexually transmitted diseases, it might be a different story. But they don't and our kids in America pay an awfully big price for their parents' ignorance. How people can justify keeping this very basic information out of the public school curriculum is beyond me. Basic anatomy and physiology should not be considered something to be feared or afraid of, or something to shield one's children from. It is basic information that all humans should have about their bodies, just like information about nutrition, physical exercise, sleep and all the things that we need to learn about keeping our bodies healthy.

patty: "These 'repercussions' wouldn't be there if parents would tell their kids the importance of abstiance until marriage, and why God set it up that way in the first place. Maybe if that were taught in schools, there would be less repercussions." The studies indicate otherwise. It isn't the knowledgeable kids who get into trouble with unwanted pregnancies and veneral diseases. It's obvious to most people that preaching to kids to abstain from sex before marriage isn't an effective deterrent. I'm not saying that all kids have sex before marriage. I am saying that you're playing with your kids' lives when you give them abstainence in the place of a comprehensive sex education that includes visually aided lessons on pregnancy prevention and sexually transmitted diseases. May I ask why you put the word repercussions in single quotes?

If YOU don't like the fact that this is not a theocratic nation, then YOU should live elsewhere, she muttered. The science behind the theory of evolution is compelling. The science behind the theory of creationism is non-existent. The schools teach science, not things that require faith to explain. That's the trouble with you right wingers, you think that if people don't agree with you that they should go live someplace else. This is my country, land of the free and the brave. Not land of the Baptists or Disciples of Christ or Catholics or (fill in the blank) other denomination. It is the home of all people, religious nor non-religious, and we are guaranteed that we will not enact laws that require the worship of any God or Budda or Allah or Thor or Zeus. If you make this a Christian nation, you've gone against all the things that make this country great. I have no problem with you worshipping your religion or even trying to win people over to your religion or belief system. But I do have a problem with you telling me that this is a Christian nation because that presumes that Christianity is the law of the land. No religion rules this land.

What are you talking about, patty? They've had trouble writing facts since the beginning of writing. And if they've had trouble with it during the past 40 to 50 years, isn't that a reason for concern?

It is really scary to think that white knuckle conservatives can re-write history via control of the textbooks our schools use. Maybe they'll use Carl Rove's book as a reference point when they write the school books, eh?

This is the first I've heard of Texas having the biggest influence over the content of historical textbooks. And teaching creationism and Christianity in the public schools here in Texas, if true, is an extremely good argument for me and my family to move as far from it as we can. The religious right are totally against teaching children about sex education, something that is biologically imperative for every person to know. They say that they are against it because they believe that it is the parents' job to do that. Nevermind that those very parents do not seem to have a solid sexual education themselves which would ensure that their children are as well educated on the topic as they need to be. The bad repercutions from no sex ed, or poor sex ed is felt throughout our society. On the other hand, they believe that the Christian religion should be taught in schools, including the theory of creationism. It makes absolutely no sense. One is actually the biological and anatomical functioning of the human body. The other is a faith in the Bible and God, which is a personal belief that changes from household to household and does not impact society if it is withheld from a child's education.

I think that Awnold Schwartznegger trumps Chuck Norris or Steven Segal, even though he's a Republican. I think maybe he's a Democrat in Republican clothing. He's conservative, but not like Chuck Norris. Who, btw, I believe was originally from Oklahoma. But Oklahoma v. Texas, that's another ugly debate. People like patty should be very afraid for Americans to embrace the idea that the U.S. is a Christian nation and that we include religious teachings in our public schools. Do they have any idea how many Islamic folks have been migrating to the U.S. as a result of our war in Iraq? One day, they might have enough clout to cause their religion to be taught in public schools not only in their homeland, but also here in the good old U.S. of A. Not too far fetched when you consider the militant posture many religious fanatics from that part of the world embrace. When you argue for a cause, it is incumbent upon you to understand the potential change and the result of that change, to its' logical end. Many people who go along with the argument of the U.S. being a theocracy are ignorant of the potential for creating something they would be totally against. They are often intimidated by the promise of hell, fire and damnation if they do not support the arguments of the extremist right wingers, who as we all know, insert fear, bigotry and satan in nearly all their arguments. They know that guilt and fear is the foundation of religion because they have had it heaped on them in abundance by their ministers and priests on a weekly, sometimes daily, basis.

Devana, my DH's father would probably be dead by now if we hadn't moved his mother to an assisted living home. She's had several strokes. She does have all her mental faculties, but does have some memory loss. She also lost the use of her left arm and leg and consequently is wheelchair bound and she has some difficulty eating as well. She wanted to stay at home with her husband, which we tried for a couple of years. But she had 3 different falls, which resulted in broken bones, when she tried to do things without asking for help. We were told by people who work with aging people that since he's so frail, if he continued to try to take care of her at night (they had help during the day) that he would die long before she did. We all tried to push that out of our minds, but then we began to see it happen. He got very sick, had several small heart attacks and other digestive issues. We took him to the ER relatively frequently. So the kids made the very hard decision that she needed to go to an assisted living home. Once he was out from under the stress of her waking him up several times a night, with him trying to assist her physically when he wasn't really capable, his health has improved dramatically. She is very unhappy and complains about not being able to be in her own home, but she needs someone to help her who is schooled in taking care of someone who can't help lift herself in and out of chairs, beds, bathroom, etc. It is very sad that after over 50 years of being married and thinking that you're always going to be there for each other, to realize that you must not only accept outside help but that you may have to live in an unfamiliar environment not only without your spouse, but also without the physical furnishings that you've accumulated and loved. But the family caregiver for someone with serious health limitations or illness is often the one who suffers the most. People need to keep that in mind when making the hard decisions that surround aging, declining loved ones.

I don't have children in the system but my little GD is here. What do I need to worry about?

They certainly do!

Have you all studied the ancient gods that were part of a belief system a long time before Christ was born? 123crod, you say that: "Throughout history there have been many gods, but they are all dead reproductions made out of cement or other materials . . ." Which makes me wonder how much you've studied the actual history of belief systems throughout the ages or if you have found one that you like and stick to it like glue. (Albeit the glue that keeps you together and not wanting to live on this earth without it.)

btreiger are you trying to say that the Republican's packages are bigger than the presidents?

That poem does pretty much encapsulate the reasons why Christianity means so much to so many people.

Leigha, when my husband left his corporate job (a major defense contractor) and started his own business, we were faced with what to do about health insurance. What we had wasn't fabulous, but what we could get was even more expensive with less coverage. Now (you may have read this earlier) we insure our employees which is very expensive for us but their coverage is better than ours. The carrier refuses to insure us because we have both had surgery within the past 5 years which they call a "preexisting condition." And they call it that as if we are going to be facing a similar surgery in the future. But both our surgeries were one time things, not ongoing problems. He had to pass a very rigorous health screening exam too in order to get new life insurance. Not a bad idea to let them do the blood work. Man, if you can figure out a way to beat this lousy system, it's very cool. I love your earlier post about the health care stats in the U.S., Canada and "England" (they may just be talking about England and not all of the U.K. I guess.) I received an email like that too (not sure if it was exactly the same one.) Your post script was awesome and the most relevant information Americans need to understand.

Glad that the news about your mother is good today, patty.

You're being too kind. It's what the extremists in this country are good at: misinformation and misleading stories and in many cases, outright lies. They're good at setting up scary scenarios that do not exist but spark the imagination of anyone who wants a reason to distrust the government. But they only do this when the government is being run by Democrats. You do not hear this kind of bull$hite when the Republicans are in control and yet, they have been the most guilty of not protecting our environment from the massive corporate polluters. If one strips away the lies and misinformation, one will quickly see through their unfair and unreasonable political hype and learn that the Democrats try to represent the majority of Americans. The Repbulicans justify polluting the environment and make lame arguments for it. The Democrats are concerned about the air we breathe, the water we drink and the food we eat. This ridiculous article coming out of Tyler is a fine example of a "red herring" to get people to turn away from the serious business of taking care of our environment. The President has no plans to place a ban on fishing the lakes of America, but they're trying to get fishermen and women to be anti-Obama for it anyway.