Abortion Stats [Archive]

strandinthewind

10-25-2005, 08:30 AM

I thought this was a cool article on the demographics of people who have abortions.

Reality Vs. Rhetoric in the Abortion Debate

Monday, October 24, 2005

By Martin Frost

I am normally reluctant to write about the highly charged issue of abortion, but this time is an exception.

For those of you who consider all abortion to be murder, you should stop reading now. These remarks are directed to the rest of the population that considers abortion appropriate in at least some circumstances — a clear majority of the American public.

Two noteworthy events occurred recently that are critical to further discussion of this very important public issue: publication by the think tank ThirdWay (search) of a study entitled “The Demographics of Abortion “ and the resignation of Susan Wood, the top Food and Drug Administration official in charge of women’s health issues.

First, let’s examine the ThirdWay study, one of the most comprehensive treatments ever put together on basic facts underlying the abortion issue in this country.

Let’s look at the basic numbers: since Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973, there have been more than 40 million abortions in America. According to the study, “one of every three American women will have an abortion by the time they reach 45.” Additionally, in a typical year there are 4.1 million live births, 1.3 million abortions and 900,000 miscarriages.

The study found that “the average woman who seeks an abortion is 24 years old, unwed, earns a yearly income of about $25,000 and already is a mother…She has religious beliefs and is a Christian…the typical abortion is performed around the eighth week — well within the first trimester.”

There are two remarkable findings buried in this study. Again quoting, “The social conservatives’ focus on so-called 'partial-birth abortion' affects, at most, eight of every 10,000 abortions performed. The social liberals’ traditional defense of abortion on the grounds of rape and incest or the life of the mother is irrelevant in approximately 98 of every 100 abortions.”

And then there is the issue of religion. The study found “There is a vast gap between the rhetorical positions that religious leaders take on abortion and the actual practices of the laity in those religions.”

Specifically, Catholics represent 27 percent of those having abortions -- roughly 350,000 per year— and Born-Again or Evangelical Christians represent 13 percent of those having abortions – roughly 170,000 per year.

Obviously, abortion is widely practiced in the United States, even though it remains controversial. Virtually no one is pro-abortion, though millions of people want it to be available as an option when a pregnancy is unplanned or when the mother’s health is seriously at risk.

So what’s the answer? One answer is to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies and thus to reduce the need for abortion.

That’s why the resignation of Assistant FDA Commissioner Susan Wood (search) is so significant.

Wood said she was leaving her position with the FDA because of FDA Commissioner Lester M. Crawford’s recent announcement that he would delay approval of the emergency contraceptive Plan B (search), which is also known as the morning-after pill.

Plan B has been available as a prescription-only drug since 1999. Its distributor applied to the FDA for permission to sell the drug over the counter, and an FDA expert advisory panel voted 23 to 4 in favor of their application. It was Crawford’s action delaying approval of this application that prompted Wood’s resignation after working for the FDA for five years.

Plan B prevents pregnancy if taken within 72 hours of sexual activity. Some religious conservatives have opposed it, even though in most cases it prevents fertilization of an egg and there is no abortion. This is the crowd that must believe that conception occurs when they take Cialis (search).

And so we have the situation that abortion is widely practiced in this country by people of all religious persuasions, many of whom are religious conservatives, and our government is taking action that could actually result in more abortions rather than fewer.

These are things that should be discussed openly, even if the subject itself is considered to be radioactive by many politicians.

Martin Frost served in Congress from 1979 to 2005, representing a diverse district in the Dallas-Ft. Worth area. He served two terms as chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, the third-ranking leadership position for House Democrats, and two terms as chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Frost serves as a regular contributor to FOX News Channel, and is currently a fellow at the Institute of Politics at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. He holds a Bachelor of Journalism degree from the University of Missouri and a law degree from the Georgetown Law Center.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,173332,00.html

Brwn_eyes0511

10-25-2005, 09:42 AM

1.3 million abortions

oh that is such a good number, wow! :rolleyes:

SuzeQuze

10-25-2005, 09:55 AM

oh that is such a good number, wow! :rolleyes:

Way to pull one stat out of context. How surprising. That is only 8/10ths of a percent of women. That said, I would also like to see the number lower via prevention.

The Tower

10-25-2005, 10:04 AM

oh that is such a good number, wow! :rolleyes:
Yet again, missing the point....
Obviously, abortion is widely practiced in the United States, even though it remains controversial. Virtually no one is pro-abortion, though millions of people want it to be available as an option when a pregnancy is unplanned or when the mother’s health is seriously at risk.

So what’s the answer? One answer is to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies and thus to reduce the need for abortion.

strandinthewind

10-25-2005, 10:05 AM

Way to pull one stat out of context. How surprising. That is only 8/10ths of a percent of women. That said, I would also like to see the number lower via prevention.

Who would not and the article goes out of its way to note very very few people are pro abortion in the sense that it should be used as a BC method. In fact, many agonize over the choice.

Also, I think the actual number of abortions has mostly declined over the last decade.

Personally, I think with proper birth control training instead of the asinine and unrealistic abstinence only crap they are trying to shove down our throats, the rate would decline even more. I mean which is the worse sin, premarital sex or abortion.

sara1998

10-25-2005, 10:11 AM

Plan B prevents pregnancy if taken within 72 hours of sexual activity. Some religious conservatives have opposed it, even though in most cases it prevents fertilization of an egg and there is no abortion. This is the crowd that must believe that conception occurs when they take Cialis (search).
What's the difference between a morning after pill, and daily birth control? Why aren't they opposing birth control?

strandinthewind

10-25-2005, 10:14 AM

What's the difference between a morning after pill, and daily birth control? Why aren't they opposing birth control?

They are. They want no one to have sex at all unless it is to procreate. Having said that, some lesser fundamentalists are less rigid and allow things like blowjobs only, which I am all for - in fact, the more the merrier I say :laugh:

The Tower

10-25-2005, 10:18 AM

I mean which is the worse sin, premarital sex or abortion.
Easy answer: there is nothing wrong with sex ever. Abortion is a sad thing, but better than an unwanted pregnancy.

They are. They want no one to have *** at all unless it is to procreate. Having said that, some lesser fundamentalists are less rigid and allow things like ******* only, which I am all for - in fact, the more the merrier I say :laugh:
And remember, one can still stay a "******" even if said person gets ****** ** ** ***. :angel:

strandinthewind

10-25-2005, 10:25 AM

. . . And remember, one can still stay a "virgin" even if said person gets ***** up the ***. :angel:

Well, if the recipient was prostrate, would that be down the a$$ :wavey:

Brwn_eyes0511

10-25-2005, 10:28 AM

Yet again, missing the point....

No I don't think I did. The point is that over 1 million babies slaughtered at the alter of Rove v. Wade again! The baby holocaust continues in America.

The Tower

10-25-2005, 10:36 AM

No I don't think I did.
Yeah, you did.

The point is that over 1 million babies slaughtered at the alter of Rove v. Wade again! The baby holocaust continues in America.
Babies are not being slaughtered- pregnancies are being terminated.

…the typical abortion is performed around the eighth week — well within the first trimester.
So, the "typical" abortion is nothing more than a voluntary miscarriage. If you think that is so awful, perhaps you might direct some your rage towards your "god". "It" seems to be on a pretty good killing spree...

Additionally, in a typical year there are 4.1 million live births, 1.3 million abortions and 900,000 miscarriages.

Brwn_eyes0511

10-25-2005, 10:39 AM

Yeah, you did.

Babies are not being slaughtered- pregnancies are being terminated.

So, the "typical" abortion is nothing more than a voluntary miscarriage. If you think that is so awful, perhaps you might direct some your rage towards your "god". "It" seems to be on a pretty good killing spree...

WOW! I have to say I'm shocked. Pro-choicer’s are now sugarcoating it with terms like "voluntary miscarriage" and "terminated"...

And now GOD is responsible for the death of babies too! WOW!

You have changed my mind...I'm pro-choice...I take it all back! :rolleyes:

sara1998

10-25-2005, 10:42 AM

The baby holocaust continues in America.
Ya, that's what it is. :rolleyes: So, you think some crack addict would make a good mother? What's that? Give it up for adoption? Why, so it can suffer birth defects for the rest of it's life? Are YOU going to adopt such a child? Who's to take care of this child? Tell me that.

strandinthewind

10-25-2005, 10:44 AM

The Tower

10-25-2005, 10:46 AM

WOW! I have to say I'm shocked. Pro-choicer’s are now sugarcoating it with terms like "voluntary miscarriage" and "terminated"...
There's nothing to sugarcoat. I don't have issues with abortion. Again, it's sad- but, it's part of life.

And now GOD is responsible for the death of babies too! WOW!
So who in the christian world is responsible for miscarriages? I thought that life and death were in "god's" hands?

You have changed my mind...I'm pro-choice...I take it all back! :rolleyes:
As if I care whether or not you are pro-choice.

Brwn_eyes0511

10-25-2005, 10:46 AM

Ya, that's what it is. :rolleyes: So, you think some crack addict would make a good mother? What's that? Give it up for adoption? Why, so it can suffer birth defects for the rest of it's life? Are YOU going to adopt such a child? Who's to take care of this child? Tell me that.

That shows you have no faith in good people in this country anymore. There are couples everyday who can't have children and would love to adopt. But it seems that adoption is not getting as much attention as the other "a" word!

"Please don't kill the child. I want the child. Please give me the child. I am willing to accept any child who would be aborted, and to give that child to a married couple who will love the child, and be loved by the child. From our children's home in Calcutta alone, we have saved over 3,000 children from abortions. These children have brought such love and joy to their adopting parents, and have grown up so full of love and joy!"
- Mother Teresa

dissention

10-25-2005, 10:46 AM

strandinthewind

10-25-2005, 10:47 AM

Don't be silly, silly. He wants the babies to be be carried to full term, that way he and his Republican heroes can cut social programs and funding that would help the mother out.

Interestingly, I believe the cute, disease free white infants are readily adopted :rolleyes:

skcin

10-25-2005, 11:08 AM

That shows you have no faith in good people in this country anymore. There are couples everyday who can't have children and would love to adopt. But it seems that adoption is not getting as much attention as the other "a" word!

Yes. :cool: There are mostly caucasian couples who want caucasian babies (preferably male, without health problems.)

Oh, and btw - there are plenty of gay couples who want to adopt but aren't allowed. I know of only ONE adoption agency who will adopt to 2 male partners. So please don't think that adoption will solve this problem.

The Tower

10-25-2005, 11:09 AM

Interestingly, I believe the cute, disease free white infants are readily adopted :rolleyes:
You are crazy. Everyone knows that the crack addicted black babies and FAS babies with massive mental disorders are all the rage right now.

strandinthewind

10-25-2005, 11:10 AM

You are crazy. Everyone knows that the crack addicted black babies and FAS babies with massive mental disorders are all the rage right now.

And - when allowed, many gay people take these babies - rather Christian of them isn't it.

Brwn_eyes0511

10-25-2005, 11:12 AM

And - when allowed, many gay people take these babies - rather Christian of them isn't it.

Oh, so now gays are the only compassionate people on the planet?

OMG! Most everything that comes out of your keyboard is utterly preposterous.

Brwn_eyes0511

10-25-2005, 11:13 AM

Yes. :cool: There are mostly caucasian couples who want caucasian babies (preferably male, without health problems.)

Oh, and btw - there are plenty of gay couples who want to adopt but aren't allowed. I know of only ONE adoption agency who will adopt to 2 male partners. So please don't think that adoption will solve this problem.

I know what will solve the problem though, for the most part.

MAKING ABORTION ILLEGAL!

dissention

10-25-2005, 11:15 AM

You are crazy. Everyone knows that the crack addicted black babies and FAS babies with massive mental disorders are all the rage right now.

Hell yes. I carry a few of them around in a papoose wherever I go because they're the hottest accessory since last season's Manolo Blahnik's.

The Tower

10-25-2005, 11:24 AM

Oh, so now gays are the only compassionate people on the planet?
He never said that. Nice putting words into people's mouths. Typical.

OMG! Most everything that comes out of your keyboard is utterly preposterous.
POT - KETTLE - BLACK

Hell yes. I carry a few of them around in a papoose wherever I go because they're the hottest accessory since last season's Manolo Blahnik's.
Paris Hilton had one last season, but she dumped it on her mom when she realized she could get her hands on a Down's Syndrom baby that survived the Indonesian Tsunami....

skcin

10-25-2005, 11:25 AM

I know what will solve the problem though, for the most part.

MAKING ABORTION ILLEGAL!

That will solve the problem of unwanted pregnancies resulting in unwanted babies growing up into unwanted kids & living in foster care or a home until they are dumped at age 18?

Brwn_eyes0511

10-25-2005, 11:25 AM

He never said that. Nice putting words into people's mouths. Typical.

POT - KETTLE - BLACK

Paris Hilton had one last season, but she dumped it on her mom when she realized she could get her hands on a Down's Syndrom baby that survived the Indonesian Tsunami....

Just hit the ignore button, please! :lol:

skcin

10-25-2005, 11:26 AM

Paris Hilton had one last season, but she dumped it on her mom when she realized she could get her hands on a Down's Syndrom baby that survived the Indonesian Tsunami....

ROTFLMAO! :xoxo:

Brwn_eyes0511

10-25-2005, 11:26 AM

That will solve the problem of unwanted pregnancies resulting in unwanted babies growing up into unwanted kids & living in foster care or a home until they are dumped at age 18?

And how did the world ever survive before modern technology?

skcin

10-25-2005, 11:34 AM

And how did the world ever survive before modern technology?

So technology forces people to get pregnant & abort? :shrug:

Well, disease & illness that people knew nothing about at the time killed a lot of kids before they reached adulthood, esp. if the kids were poor & couldn't afford medical treatment. Harsh, but true. Also, many many babies and moms died during childbirth due to complications.

Not to mention the fact that women have been using home remedies for centuries (herbs, etc) to induce miscarriage, or did home abortions. Or committed suicide. It's not like unwanted pregnancies and terminating them have just started occuring in our lifetime.

Yeah, damn that technology, let's go back to the old days! :nod:

:rolleyes:

Brwn_eyes0511

10-25-2005, 11:35 AM

So technology forces people to get pregnant & abort? :shrug:

WOOOOOOOOSH! What was that.

I thinkt he sound of, whatever I just said, going over your head.

The Tower

10-25-2005, 11:35 AM

Just hit the ignore button, please! :lol:
Sorry, ain't gonna happen.

And how did the world ever survive before modern technology?
For the most part, it didn't.

"God" rained down disease and killed off the weak before they grew into adulthood and our modern social safety nets didn't exist. Abortion existed, though.

http://www.answers.com/topic/abortion
"History of Abortion

Abortion induced by herbs or manipulation was used as a form of birth control in ancient Egypt, Greece, and Rome and probably earlier. In the Middle Ages in Western Europe it was generally accepted in the early months of pregnancy. However, in the 19th cent. opinion about abortion changed. In 1869 the Roman Catholic Church prohibited abortion under any circumstances. In England and in the United States in the 19th cent. stringent antiabortion laws were passed."

skcin

10-25-2005, 11:37 AM

WOOOOOOOOSH! What was that.

I thinkt he sound of, whatever I just said, going over your head.

Oh no, sweetie. It went right in. Thank God I was able to spew it out soon enough. :D

See the rest of my answer (and Tower's) to answer your question about wht happened before technology.

Brwn_eyes0511

10-25-2005, 11:37 AM

Sorry, ain't gonna happen.

For the most part, it didn't.

"God" rained down disease and killed off the weak before they grew into adulthood and our modern social safety nets didn't exist. Abortion existed, though.

http://www.answers.com/topic/abortion
"History of Abortion

Abortion induced by herbs or manipulation was used as a form of birth control in ancient Egypt, Greece, and Rome and probably earlier. In the Middle Ages in Western Europe it was generally accepted in the early months of pregnancy. However, in the 19th cent. opinion about abortion changed. In 1869 the Roman Catholic Church prohibited abortion under any circumstances. In England and in the United States in the 19th cent. stringent antiabortion laws were passed."

Then I'm just going to start ignoring you...

The Tower

10-25-2005, 11:38 AM

Then I'm just going to start ignoring you...
Well, that's a start!

skcin

10-25-2005, 11:54 AM

Then I'm just going to start ignoring you...

Again with your ignore button obsession.

Why haven't you addressed the answers Tower & I gave you? About technology? :shrug:

EDIT: Of course, now you're gone. Seems to happen a lot that you post & debate here for a few hours & then leave suddenly, usually when things get heated or someone poses you a difficult question or seriously answers a sarcastic question you had asked.

I'm sure it's just a coincidence. No big. Hopefully you can address Tower's & my posts when you get back.

sara1998

10-25-2005, 12:11 PM

Then I'm just going to start ignoring you...
Ignore him for what? Calling you out?

Brwn_eyes0511

10-25-2005, 12:13 PM

Again with your ignore button obsession.

Why haven't you addressed the answers Tower & I gave you? About technology? :shrug:

EDIT: Of course, now you're gone. Seems to happen a lot that you post & debate here for a few hours & then leave suddenly, usually when things get heated or someone poses you a difficult question or seriously answers a sarcastic question you had asked.

I'm sure it's just a coincidence. No big. Hopefully you can address Tower's & my posts when you get back.

Because it doesn't change the point of my original idea that abortion is murder. What you post about abortions is the past I already knew about, and I never claimed that "modern technology" was the cause of abortion..."modern stupidity" can be blamed for that.

Brwn_eyes0511

10-25-2005, 12:14 PM

Ignore him for what? Calling you out?

Because I'm having a bad day! :lol:

sara1998

10-25-2005, 12:15 PM

That shows you have no faith in good people in this country anymore.
You have no faith in women to make the right decisions for theirselves.

skcin

10-25-2005, 12:18 PM

Because it doesn't change the point of my original idea that abortion is murder. What you post about abortions is the past I already knew about, and I never claimed that "modern technology" was the cause of abortion..."modern stupidity" can be blamed for that.

People are stupider now? :shrug:

I know what you meant, but I wanted to point out that this is NOT a new problem. Abortions have been done for years & years & nobody ever talked about it. It wasn't an issue, because there weren't any laws addressing it. People just did what they felt they had to do, whether it was dangerous/deadly/wrong/whatever.

Brwn_eyes0511

10-25-2005, 12:24 PM

People are stupider now? :shrug:

I know what you meant, but I wanted to point out that this is NOT a new problem. Abortions have been done for years & years & nobody ever talked about it. It wasn't an issue, because there weren't any laws addressing it. People just did what they felt they had to do, whether it was dangerous/deadly/wrong/whatever.

But it isn't the governments job to make the "destruction of babies" legal. The point is that the case for Roe v. Wade was never a strong one to begin with.

Brwn_eyes0511

10-25-2005, 12:25 PM

You have no faith in women to make the right decisions for theirselves.

That is degrading to women everywhere.

dissention

10-25-2005, 12:28 PM

You have no faith in women to make the right decisions for theirselves.

Amen. You've managed to cut through the bull**** with one simple sentence.

Brwn_eyes0511

10-25-2005, 12:30 PM

Ok. I'm taking Neal's adivce and I'm going to leave this thread. Like he said...I never should have taken the bait to begin with.

skcin

10-25-2005, 12:36 PM

But it isn't the governments job to make the "destruction of babies" legal. The point is that the case for Roe v. Wade was never a strong one to begin with.

Well, you claim you're gone but I'm not leaving this thread.

"Destruction of babies" isn't legal as far as I'm aware. If you destroy a baby, which is a human after it comes out of its mother's womb, then that's murder & you go to jail. Nope, nothing legal about destroying babies in the U.S.

Terminating a pregnancy? Yes, legal. As well it should be.

DavidMn

10-25-2005, 12:42 PM

Ok, heres the deal with me, I don't like the idea of it, but I'm not a woman. Hope that makes sense.

skcin

10-25-2005, 12:43 PM

Ok, heres the deal with me, I don't like the idea of it, but I'm not a woman. Hope that makes sense.

It does. I think you're a genius. :xoxo:

sara1998

10-25-2005, 12:44 PM

That is degrading to women everywhere.
It's degrading that some conservative nutcases think they can say what is right in the lives of women who are carrying fetuses that they will not be able to care for/want/or will have birth defects.

Neal

10-25-2005, 12:45 PM

Ok. I'm taking Neal's adivce and I'm going to leave this thread. Like he said...I never should have taken the bait to begin with.

Whoah Nelly! Don't drag my name into this... :angel:

sara1998

10-25-2005, 12:47 PM

Whoah Nelly! Don't drag my name into this... :angel:
haaaaaaaaahahahahaha!

DavidMn

10-25-2005, 12:59 PM

It does. I think you're a genius. :xoxo:Well, I'm just trying to be sensible I guess.:) WHat happens if I have a sex change though?:laugh:

dissention

10-25-2005, 01:00 PM

Well, I'm just trying to be sensible I guess.:) WHat happens if I have a sex change though?:laugh:

You still wouldn't have ovaries, babe.

strandinthewind

10-25-2005, 01:01 PM

It's degrading that some conservative nutcases think they can say what is right in the lives of women who are carrying fetuses that they will not be able to care for/want/or will have birth defects.

Child - those a$$holes want to tell you who you can fu*k, where you can fu*k8K, and how you can fu*k. They also want you to be like they say they are, but most of them fall from grace just like everyone else, but its okay when they do it a la Jimmy Swaggart, Pat Robinson, Jerry Falwell, the Roman Catholic Church and those pesky pedophiles, etc. Then, you need to send them $25 a day while they berate you and tell you you are worthless unless you do as they say, which ordinarily has nothing to do with anything that came out of Christ's mouth :rolleyes:

dissention

10-25-2005, 01:04 PM

Child - those a$$holes want to tell you who you can fu*k, where you can fu*k8K, and how you can fu*k.

With Jesse Helms in the senate for so long, it's a miracle there aren't federal laws for such things.

strandinthewind

10-25-2005, 01:04 PM

A few points directed at the one with the Brown Eyes.

You are 100% against the killing of the embryos, and yet you completely support war? Well, this war anyway, the unjustified one built on a lie.

You have a problem with "sugarcoating" terms, like voluntary miscarriage, and yet you have no problem exagerrating abortion with terms like "slaughter" and "destruction of babies."

Approximately one fifth of pregnancies result in abortion (based on the statistics in post one). If they were all born, the world would have another billion people or so. I'm not quite sure what the number is up to now, but there are already an awful lot a people around, which has caused quite a few problems throughout the world. Now let's all get pregnant and use abortion as a way to control the population and in just a few short years, we will be back down to the more reasonable number of five million of so. Weeee!

Well said (as usual)

The problem is, our unlearned arm chair quaterbacking friend will likely never adopt one of those unwanted black embyos he so struggles to save nor will he fight in his beloved war, which mostly black people are fighting for him - no wonder he opposes abortion.

I think his hypocrisy is glaring.

sara1998

10-25-2005, 01:06 PM

Child - those a$$holes want to tell you who you can fu*k, where you can fu*k8K, and how you can fu*k.
...just when I was getting back in the game.....:lol:

strandinthewind

10-25-2005, 01:07 PM

With Jesse Helms in the senate for so long, it's a miracle there aren't federal laws for such things.

Lord Child - what a hypocritical a$$

Here is a wildly slanted lambaste of him

http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/1995/05/bates.html

What You Need to Know about Jesse Helms
The senator from North Carolina is racist, divisive, pro-government (when it favors the wealthy), and anti-democratic. So why did American voters swing towards Helms and the extreme right last November?

Eric Bates
May/June 1995 Issue

Jesse Helms sits at the head of the curved rostrum, a faint smile on his lips, listening attentively to testimony about the beleaguered Mexican economy. It is his second hearing as chair of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, and he has been a model of procedure and decorum. He has kept his remarks brief, demurred to the newest members, doled out equal time to Democrats and Republicans, and treated Clinton administration officials with courtesy and perhaps even a touch of deference.

Dr. Sidney Weintraub of the Center for Strategic and International Studies has just finished testifying in support of an administration plan to provide Mexico with $40 billion in loan guarantees. Helms, who opposes the aid package, leans forward to question Weintraub.

"Would you feel differently," he asks, "if you were informed that the president of Mexico has declared in a press conference yesterday and again this morning that he will accept no conditions on this loan?"

The packed hearing room grows still. Helms is renowned for maintaining his own network of sources in Latin America, and for dropping bombshells in committee hearings.

Weintraub is guarded. "No conditions of any kind?"

Helms nods. "Yes, sir."

"If he would accept no conditions," Weintraub concedes, "then I would not support the loan."

Helms looks satisfied. "Well, I think that is important." Then he adds, almost as an aside, "I am not saying he has."

The room explodes in laughter.

"Now wait a minute," Helms says. "The report last night was flat-out, and I have been trying to trace it, and I am told the Associated Press moved it and then pulled it back. I'm not sure about that. I have only a report from the British Broadcasting Corporation, which has various statements made by President Zedillo, and we are attempting to ascertain what the facts are." Something sinister is going on south of the border, Helms seems to suggest, and he is going to get to the bottom of it.

Moments later, his aides give reporters the BBC story, which quotes Zedillo as saying he will accept no loan conditions that will "undermine Mexican sovereignty." It is the kind of thing a politician says to allay nationalist fears--not, as Helms implied, an outright refusal to negotiate repayment terms.

It is a classic Helms maneuver. The Mexican loan package is complex, but the senator has sidetracked the entire debate by turning a nonfact into a central issue. "No conditions" becomes a refrain throughout the hearing, creating a false impression of Mexican deadbeats trying to get something for nothing from American taxpayers. Weintraub spends the rest of the morning on the defensive, refuting something that no one had any reason to believe was true in the first place.

INNUENDO AND DIVERSION

After nearly a quarter century in the Senate, Helms understands how a determined minority of one can influence the national agenda. Whether he is suggesting that the commander in chief needs a bodyguard or demanding that Fidel Castro leave Cuba "in a vertical or horizontal position," Helms is well-known for his use of innuendo and diversion. Even the Republican Party treats him as a rogue elephant, powerful yet dangerously erratic. But the recent GOP stampede has given Helms a respected position from which to trumpet his bitter opposition to abortion, gay rights, racial equality, arts funding, and aid to what he calls "foreign rat holes."

His agenda is driven by a lifelong opposition to democracy and diversity. In his first months as Foreign Relations chair, Helms called for tougher sanctions against Cuba, accused Haitian President Jean Bertrand Aristide of unleashing "vigilance committees," and moved to gut support for developing nations. On the home front, he introduced a bill to eliminate all affirmative action programs, which he denounced as "reverse discrimination at the hands of ruthless bureaucrats."

How did someone so mean-spirited end up in a position to act on his divisive politics? For the most part, Helms wins political battles by keeping the spotlight on the morality plays he stages. To hear conservatives tell it, Helms is a personal friend of Jesus Christ, a populist defender of the little guy, and a bitter opponent of big government.

Shifting the spotlight reveals a different Helms. A former bank lobbyist whose fundraising machine has been fined for breaking federal campaign laws, Helms favors a big-spending, activist government--one that aids those in economic power. He voted to bail out the savings and loan industry, for example, and has seldom met a big-ticket missile system he didn't like. By contrast, he has voted to slash school lunches for impoverished children, medical care for disabled veterans, prescription drugs for the elderly, and wages for working families (see "On the record," below).

"Looking at the record, people ought to understand that Helms is not representing them on the great majority of issues," says Rep. Melvin Watt, a North Carolina Democrat. "They perceive that he stands up for the little guy, but he really stands up for rich people rather than poor and working-class people."

NEGLECTING NORTH CAROLINA

James Harrington is one of the little guys. He doesn't vote. At 63, he retired last year from a loading job in Raleigh, N.C., and gets around with the help of a walker. He rents a ramshackle house in a black neighborhood for $250 a month, no heater, no appliances. Helms, he says, is just like any other politician. "They promise you a whole lot, but you can hold what you get from them in a small paper bag."

Beecher White votes. She cleans tables and washes dishes at two restaurants. For the past 16 years she has rented a modest house in a predominantly white part of Raleigh: $325 a month, no appliances. She likes Helms because "he is unpopular with liberals. I'm a conservative, so that's fine with me. I'm opposed to homosexual rights and abortion, and in favor of a balanced budget, increased defense spending, and Christian prayer in the schools. Helms is like my granddaddy."

Harrington and White are more than a cross section of the North Carolina electorate. Both live in rental units owned by Helms' wife Dorothy. The couple's personal property--including their home and the more than a dozen rental units they own between them--is valued for tax purposes at more than $1.4 million. An investigation by The Independent, a weekly newspaper in Durham, found that the Helmses employ two rental agents to manage their properties--one in low-income black neighborhoods and another in middle-class white areas. Some of the low-income units are in disrepair; Harrington's house has a rusty fuse box, peeling linoleum, missing doors, and a leaky ceiling.

If Helms the landlord neglects some of his tenants, Helms the senator fails to provide for many North Carolinians. Only four states receive less per capita in federal funds; only eight have more residents living in poverty. The state currently ranks 42nd in the release of cancer-causing toxins, 43rd in manufacturing wages, and 44th in infant mortality.

To obscure his record, Helms relies on a potent combination of money and fear mongering. Since he was first elected to the Senate in 1972, Helms has raised hell, introducing amendments he knows will be defeated simply to force recorded votes. He has also raised money, founding the North Carolina Congressional Club, a political action committee that quickly became the nation's most successful moneymaking machine. The club freed Helms from the restraints operating on most politicians: He no longer needed the party to raise money, and he no longer needed the media to reach voters.

But his fundraising edge has never bought Helms a stunning margin of victory. Although he outspent his opponent 30-to-1 in his first bid for re-election, the senator won by only 103,000 votes out of 1.1 million cast. Six years later, when Reagan carried North Carolina with 62 percent of the vote, Helms raised a record $16.5 million and barely edged by with 52 percent. Trailing in the polls to black architect Harvey Gantt two weeks before the 1990 elections, Helms used an infusion of national capital to air a set of overtly racist commercials and squeaked through with only 53 percent.

Those narrow victories indicate how sharply Helms polarizes voters. "Right now there are 45 percent of the people going to vote for him if he runs two years from now, and 45 percent going to vote against him," says North Carolina AFL-CIO President Christopher Scott, who has followed Helms' Senate career closely. "He's never won an election by more than 55 percent, and when he's been seriously challenged it's been closer than that. He's been able to artfully use racism and negative character assassination to pull just enough votes over the line to win."

Many white North Carolinians are no doubt motivated to vote for Helms because of the almost primal fears he fans. "The principles we're espousing have been around for thousands of years," former aide James Lucier once explained, citing the "prepolitical" themes of God, family, property, and national pride.

But some voters are also attracted to Helms by the personal qualities that make him a rarity among politicians. He brings genuine passion and a sense of moral purpose to what he does. He stands on principle and refuses to compromise. He stands by his friends, and he forces opponents to vote on issues they would rather ignore.

"Most North Carolinians are not as conservative as Jesse Helms," says Paul Luebke, a state representative and author of Tar Heel Politics. "But by presenting himself as a man of courage, willing to stand up against 'tax-and-spend liberals,' homosexuality, and so forth, Helms commands respect."

But respect only goes so far--so the Helms campaign hedges its bets by cheating. In 1986, the Federal Election Commission penalized the North Carolina Congressional Club $10,000 and ordered it to reorganize, saying it had illegally subsidized Helms' 1984 campaign. Last year, a decade after the race, the FEC penalized the Helms for Senate committee $25,000 for accepting $700,000 in illegal contributions. And in 1992, the Helms campaign and the Congressional Club settled a Justice Department complaint over a pre-election mailing of postcards falsely threatening 125,000 black voters with jail if they went to the polls.

POLITICS OF SEGREGATION

The strategy that helped Republicans sweep to power last November is one that Jesse Helms perfected decades ago. "Jesse Helms understood before anyone else that the proverbial angry white male feels the most aggrieved, and is therefore the most likely to vote," says Larry Sabato, a professor of government at the University of Virginia. "Jesse Helms was an angry white male before most of his compatriots were. He should have been lucky enough to be on the ballot in '94. He would have won easily."

Unlike many of his Republican counterparts, Helms has changed little over the past 50 years. Long before Rush Limbaugh, Helms pioneered the use of television to rally public sentiment. While Ronald Reagan was losing primaries to Gerald Ford, Helms mobilized the religious right and built one of the most profitable political fundraising machines ever. And long after die-hard segregationists like George Wallace and Strom Thurmond began courting black voters, Helms fueled white fears by opposing a national holiday in honor of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., whistling "Dixie" while standing next to Senator Carol Moseley-Braun, and supporting apartheid in South Africa.

"His racial politics are deeply held convictions, not simply politics of convenience," says Christopher Scott. "He has a view of a fundamentalist Christian society in which everyone is not welcome. If you could pick up the South Africa of 20 years ago and transplant it to America, that's what he would do."

Born in Monroe, N.C., in the fall of 1921, Helms grew up in a segregated world not unlike the one of apartheid. He dropped out of college to work full time as a reporter before discovering the two arenas that would shape his career: broadcasting and politics. He learned about radio as a Navy recruiter during World War II and stuck with the emerging medium as news director of a fledgling station in Raleigh. And he was an "unofficial" researcher for conservative Willis Smith, whose 1950 Senate campaign is still considered one of the meanest and most racially divisive in the country's history. (One of Smith's ads featured a doctored photo of the incumbent's wife dancing with a black man. Helms has denied any involvement, but a newspaper advertising manager later told Helms biographer Ernest Furgurson that Helms personally cut up the photos.)

Smith won, and Helms was rewarded with a job as staff administrative assistant. In 1953, Helms returned to North Carolina as executive director of the state's banking association, spending the next seven years fighting to enrich his bosses. He won a seat on the Raleigh City Council and, in 1960, took a job as a TV commentator. He spent the decade railing against King, "Negro hoodlums," the media, "sex perverts," and anyone on welfare. As he explained in one of his nightly five-minute broadcasts, "A lot of human beings have been born bums."

Since Helms won election to the Senate, no "bums" have felt his rage as fiercely as citizens of poor nations. Over the years, the senator has proposed hundreds of measures to slash foreign aid, overthrow governments he doesn't like, and block administration policies. As the new chair of the Foreign Relations Committee, he has made it clear that his first priority is to enact deeper cuts to a foreign aid budget already slashed nearly 30 percent in the past decade.

"The fact is that the American people are sick and tired of this whole foreign aid concept anyhow," Helms said last year. "I find myself wishing that somehow we could put it on a national ballot and say: 'What do you think of this?'"

Those cuts will hit hardest in the Third World, where Helms has long been a staunch ally of right-wing military rulers like Augusto Pinochet in Chile, Raoul Cedras in Haiti, and Roberto D'Aubuisson in El Salvador. Confronted with evidence that D'Aubuisson directed death squads to murder civilians, Helms made it clear that some things are more important than human life. "All I know," he replied, "is that D'Aubuisson is a free enterprise man and deeply religious."

A SHADOW STATE DEPARTMENT

Helms has long maintained an extensive network of contacts in Latin America that serves as a sort of shadow State Department. "For years he had a cadre of young people who were very well-connected," says a committee staff member. "You could have set them down in any South American junta and they would have been right at home."

The problem, say those familiar with his network, is that the information it provides is one-sided. "When I bring people to his office to tell him what we've seen, we aren't even allowed in," says Gail Phares, who leads delegations to Central America through Witness for Peace. "I remember when one delegation managed to get in and told his staff what they'd seen and heard in Nicaragua about the contras killing doctors and nurses and children, their response was, 'Well, they're just Communists--they deserve to die.'"

Such careless remarks concern the new Republican leadership, but Helms is simply too valuable--and too powerful--to silence. In effect, his unpredictable outbursts serve the GOP by tilting the agenda to the extreme right. "Helms is a wild card," says one former committee staffer. "You never know where he will pop up--and that keeps the opposition guessing."

Helms also keeps the media guessing. His staff refused an interview for this article, but Helms recently exhibited his disdain for journalists when a Washington Post reporter asked him what he considered his biggest accomplishment as senator. "Raising the blood pressure of reporters and editors like you so easily and so often," Helms replied.

After nearly half a century of outraging his enemies, Helms may need to watch his own blood pressure. At 73, he has been slowed down by prostate cancer and heart surgery, and several staffers say privately that the senator visited the hospital in January complaining of chest pain. Helms has broken with many longtime allies, purging several key staffers and ending his formal ties both to the fundraising machine now called the National Conservative Club and to a spin-off group accused of illegalities by the IRS.

Some observers feel that federal scrutiny of his campaign network, along with his failing health, could make Helms vulnerable now that he has indicated he will run for re-election in 1996. But such predictions have been made before, and Helms has overcome the odds.

What would Helms do with a fifth term? "If you think he's bad now, wait until you see what he's like if he wins again," says Christopher Scott of the North Carolina AFL-CIO. "The biggest fear people should have is that if Helms is re-elected, he will understand that the next term would almost inevitably be his last. He will feel no constraint--he won't have to worry about political realities. It will be his final chance to shove it to those people he doesn't like."

For a list of resources on Jesse Helms, see our resource guide.

Eric Bates is investigative editor of Southern Exposure and director of the Investigative Action Fund of the Institute for Southern Studies in Durham, N.C. Research assistance by David Ramm.

dissention

10-25-2005, 01:10 PM

whistling "Dixie" while standing next to Senator Carol Moseley-Braun

I so remember that. They were in an elevator together and he starts singing about being back in the cotton fields, telling his buddy (was it Trent Lott?) that he wants to make her cry, to which she replies "With singing like that, you'll accomplish it." :laugh:

DavidMn

10-25-2005, 01:11 PM

You still wouldn't have ovaries, babe.Oops, forgot that little detail.:laugh:

strandinthewind

10-25-2005, 01:11 PM

I so remember that. They were in an elevator together and he starts singing about being back in the cotton fields, telling his buddy (was it Trent Lott?) that he wants to make her cry, to which she replies "With singing like that, you'll accomplish it." :laugh:

OMG - I never heard that one!!!!!!!

dissention

10-25-2005, 01:13 PM

OMG - I never heard that one!!!!!!!

She's a real spitfire. Something in my heart died when she dropped out of the race last year. At least Kucinich and Sharpton stuck it out, though.

golddustwoman77

10-25-2005, 04:20 PM

My personal opinion is that everyone has to make their OWN decision. No one can tell them what is the right thing to do, because no one knows what they would do when confronted with this situtation, especially not a typically male-run government (who can't even carry a child or have any understanding about what that is like) that is hundreds or thousands of miles away who don't know or care about this female's situation! As you noticed in the stats, these are people that really can afford to have another child. Of course, pro-life people want you to have the baby, but where are they when you have to feed, clothe, and raise it. Republicans have time and time again cut welfare that goes to individuals like the ones in this article. They want you to have the child, but they sure aren't going to help you support it.

On the religious end, it is GOD who is supposed to pass judgement. It is not our place to pass judgement on these individuals. If abortion is wrong, then these people will be judge by God when their time comes. It isn't my place or others to play God and pass judgement. Doesn't it say in the Bible that no sin is greater than another? The answer is yes, therefore who is to say that abortion is a greater sin than any other thing that could be wrong to do.

You could also get into the scientific aspects of things. Many scientists and doctors would argue that it isn't truly a living being until it can live on its own. In the first trimester, that isn't possible, therefore it isn't truly a living being yet. The heartbeat, etc. are actually the mother's and not the embryo's. Everything about the embryo that makes it seem "alive" is actually the mother's.

In conclusion, it isn't anyone's business. It is between the female, her doctor, and her God. There isn't any room for anyone else, IMO.

strandinthewind

10-25-2005, 04:31 PM

^^^^

Well put my dear.

Brwn_eyes0511

10-25-2005, 04:42 PM

It is between the female, her doctor, and her God.

Does the baby get a say in any of this?

DAMN! I'm going to stay out of this, I'm going to stay out of this, I'm going to stay out of this!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

golddustwoman77

10-25-2005, 04:58 PM

irishgrl

10-25-2005, 05:00 PM

Does the baby get a say in any of this?
DAMN! I'm going to stay out of this, I'm going to stay out of this, I'm going to stay out of this!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well, I come to this late, but I come ARMED! BYGOD, no MAN is gonna tell ME what I can or cant DO with MY OWN FREAKIN BODY! And that should go for every person, man or woman! Why, in this day and time, a woman still needs to fight for a basic right to autonomy just shows how insidious the patriarchal mindset really is. ARRGH!

Brwn_eyes, you best hush yo mouth. You are just being a good little parrot and repeating your lameass fundie refrain and you have absolutely NO IDEA about the history of abortion and why it was originally illegal in this country, or the real reason why making it legal was finally acceptable in the eyes of the court.

GateandGarden

10-25-2005, 05:22 PM

I know what will solve the problem though, for the most part.

MAKING ABORTION ILLEGAL!Mari already told us in another thread why that doesn't appear to work.

sparky

10-25-2005, 05:31 PM

Every time I have tried to ask an embryo its true feelings and opinions about the world, politics, etc., I am greeted with a cold and uncomfortable silence. Although I cannot officially explain why this happens so consistently, I have come to the conclusion that embyros are inherently moody and I will leave well enough alone and stop bothering them. If they're so high and mighty that they won't even answer my simple questions, why should I go to great lengths to defend them?

Bobo, you are a rock star.

Tower, where have you been ?

irishgrl

10-25-2005, 05:33 PM

golddustwoman77

10-25-2005, 05:36 PM

^^^^

Well put my dear.

Thanks, I try. :xoxo:

Jessica Leigh

10-25-2005, 05:48 PM

What's the difference between a morning after pill, and daily birth control? Why aren't they opposing birth control?

a regular day to day BC pill helps stop fertilization in addition to stopping implantation (if it occurs) but with the morning after pill, only implantation is prohibited... so if a woman had unprotected sex and the egg was fertilized and she took the morning after pill, implantation would be stopped and the pregnancy would never progress, the fertilized egg dissolve or be shed with the monthly cycle... this has far right wingers complaining that it is the same as abortion and having the morning after pill available over the counter would be the same as buying the abortion pill over the counter. they all get their panties in a knot trying to decide when fertilized egg is really a person etc... i don't know... i don't think a zygote counts so much...

GateandGarden

10-25-2005, 05:50 PM

This is what I think. Since I was once on Brandon's side, not many years ago, I really think that y'all aren't getting anywhere with him in particular (and never have as long as he's been a Ledgie) unless you leave the choice issue itself and explain why it isn't murder. Otherwise, you're finding ways to justify murder in his eyes. When I was pro-life, the same reasons for the other side where thrown in my direction often but they didn't mean anything. Nothing made murder okay for me, particularly the murder of the innocent and defenseless. For example, convicted murderers who are sentenced to death are murdered themselves at a time when they are defenseless. Many helpless civilians are murdered during wartime. If you believe that what is in the womb is a life, then that person is utterly defenseless and is murdered whenever someone terminates a pregnancy. I'm stating the obvious from the conservative/Republican perspective (at least the abortion part, not necessarily the other examples at all) but I'm just trying to point these things out because I don't think they've really been addressed.

Honestly, it doesn't really sit well with me and it probably never will. To me, terminating a pregnancy after the first month is killing a baby, but that is a belief, not a fact. I don't know how to eliminate that particular part of my belief system and I regret expressing it, but I have always felt that way. But it goes into the realm of religion and spirituality and then out of the realm of law, hopefully. I don't want to tell people what to do with their bodies, regardless. And I really don't know what I would do if I were in that situation, so I'm in no position to tell anyone else they shouldn't do something. That is how I reconcile it in my mind. :shrug:

Jessica Leigh

10-25-2005, 05:54 PM

I know what will solve the problem though, for the most part.

MAKING ABORTION ILLEGAL!

you are a man. keep your opinions off of my body. when you conceive and carry a child then you can have an opinion about abortion. phhht... if men could have babies abortion would be a sacrament.

Neal

10-25-2005, 05:58 PM

GateandGarden

10-25-2005, 06:03 PM

Thank god for you Hillary! :xoxo: That is exactly the way I feel about the issue, but I've never really found an appropriate way to articulate myself so I just keep my mouth shut whenever these topics arise... :nod:Really? Wow! I feel much less alone now. :) I always feel like there are no other liberals who feel the way I do. And I understand very well why you don't like to get into it. I took forever just to write that post because I never feel like I manage to explain my beliefs clearly.

DavidMn

10-25-2005, 06:52 PM

Really? Wow! I feel much less alone now. :) I always feel like there are no other liberals who feel the way I do. And I understand very well why you don't like to get into it. I took forever just to write that post because I never feel like I manage to explain my beliefs clearly.Very well said!!:thumbsup:

The Tower

10-25-2005, 07:30 PM

Tower, where have you been ?
Work is killing me. Last weekend was spent immersed in The Sims 2 and relaxing. Otherwise, same-o same-o. My Ledgie time is mostly during the day and all that other fun stuff that was going on around here pretty much came and went before I got a chance to jump in the hot tub.

Really? Wow! I feel much less alone now. :) I always feel like there are no other liberals who feel the way I do. And I understand very well why you don't like to get into it. I took forever just to write that post because I never feel like I manage to explain my beliefs clearly.
Most people don't like the concept of abortion, including liberals. However, it is a reality of life. I think the quality of life is so much more important than the concept of life. So, protecting the right for the mother (and father) to make that is decision is important.

GateandGarden

10-25-2005, 07:47 PM

Very well said!!:thumbsup:Thank you. :)

sparky

10-25-2005, 07:50 PM

Work is killing me. Last weekend was spent immersed in The Sims 2 and relaxing. Otherwise, same-o same-o. My Ledgie time is mostly during the day and all that other fun stuff that was going on around here pretty much came and went before I got a chance to jump in the hot tub.

At least you are getting to relax a bit.
Just know when you aren't around you are missed.:xoxo:

strandinthewind

10-25-2005, 07:52 PM

. . . Just know when you aren't around you are missed.:xoxo:

Did Stevie write that ~~~~~~~

sparky

10-25-2005, 07:56 PM

Did Stevie write that ~~~~~~~

You added the ~~~........not me, Frank.....

*~~~~Sparkshine~~~~*

strandinthewind

10-25-2005, 07:59 PM

You added the ~~~........not me, Frank.....

*~~~~Sparkshine~~~~*

ooooooo - Sparky Mary
well things will be different
when I shave my back
you take all of the clippings
ooooo everything's smooth baby
so sometime tonight ?
ooooo -- I see
Welcome to the heartache
Strandola
FOR SPARKY
When you put down those clippers
you cease to exist

__________________________________

I am sooooo bored - can ya tell :xoxo:

The Tower

10-25-2005, 08:02 PM

At least you are getting to relax a bit.
Just know when you aren't around you are missed.:xoxo:
:xoxo: :xoxo: :xoxo:

I am sooooo bored - can ya tell :xoxo:
Yes.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

GateandGarden

10-25-2005, 08:02 PM

Most people don't like the concept of abortion, including liberals. However, it is a reality of life. I think the quality of life is so much more important than the concept of life. So, protecting the right for the mother (and father) to make that is decision is important.I don't think anyone actually likes the idea of abortion, but I don't think very many liberals consider it murder.

strandinthewind

10-25-2005, 08:05 PM

I don't think anyone actually likes the idea of abortion, but I don't think very many liberals consider it murder.

Legal definitions aside, I tend to disagree. I say this because I think many people who have abortions agonize over that exact point, but opt for it because of varying things. In other words, their deliberation suggests they think it is a life as well. I know very few people who have an abortion or abortions and think nothing of it.

Anyway - my $0.02

irishgrl

10-25-2005, 08:06 PM

Honestly, it doesn't really sit well with me and it probably never will. To me, terminating a pregnancy after the first month is killing a baby, but that is a belief, not a fact. I don't know how to eliminate that particular part of my belief system and I regret expressing it, but I have always felt that way. But it goes into the realm of religion and spirituality and then out of the realm of law, hopefully. I don't want to tell people what to do with their bodies, regardless. And I really don't know what I would do if I were in that situation, so I'm in no position to tell anyone else they shouldn't do something. That is how I reconcile it in my mind. :shrug:
At least you're a bit more open minded than the radical right wingers... (EDIT: I had a brain fart saying that. that is all)

My problem with the war over Roe v. Wade, is that a vocal minority (and it is still a minority) is attempting to push THEIR version of morality on the rest of us. My spiritual philosophy believes that what makes a being "alive" is his/her SOUL, not just the mere fact of breathing.

So the issue would then be, when does a soul enter a body? at first breath? within the first few months? Many cultures wait a certain length of time before "welcoming" a newborn into the world, because they believe the soul isnt "fixed" into the body until then. Some souls change their minds and depart (crib death?)

If you believe in Reincarnation (as I do) you would know that you will live again, and I cant imagine any spirit entering a body destined for imminent death....at any rate, I certainly DONT want another person's morality shoved down my throat via the laws of this country. That isnt right and is just one example why we need to insist on separation of Church and State. No mandatory prayer in classrooms, no "under God" in the pledge, leave Roe v. Wade ALONE, teach SCIENCE in the classrooms, not worked over Bible stories....GAD!

sparky

10-25-2005, 08:13 PM

ooooooo - Sparky Mary
well things will be different
when I shave my back
you take all of the clippings
ooooo everything's smooth baby
so sometime tonight ?
ooooo -- I see
Welcome to the heartache
Strandola
FOR SPARKY
When you put down those clippers
you cease to exist

__________________________________

I am sooooo bored - can ya tell :xoxo:

When I see you again
Will your back be waxed?
When I see you again
Will it be fur free ?
When I see you again
Will your stylist still say
He's still on the the wax bed
Gotta run his Amex
Sparky, Sparky
He's still on the wax bed
Go and get a cocktail
Let me trim your scruff now
Spaaaarrrky
Gotta shave the nutbag
Gotta trim the chest hair
Sparrrrrrrrrrrrkyyyyyyyy

GateandGarden

10-25-2005, 08:14 PM

At least you're a bit more open minded than the radical right wingers...
Mary! "a bit more open minded"?!?!? Come on. You know I'm a radical liberal.

irishgrl

10-25-2005, 08:15 PM

Mary! "a bit more open minded"?!?!? Come on. You know I'm a radical liberal.
it didnt sound like you were on THIS topic, my mistake :distress: :sorry: by the way, I edited that other post.
however, since you quoted me, it will now live on in INFAMY~ (thanks a heap!)

strandinthewind

10-25-2005, 08:16 PM

When I see you again
Will your back be waxed?
When I see you again
Will it be fur free ?
When I see you again
Will your stylist still say
He's still on the the wax bed
Gotta run his Amex
Sparky, Sparky
He's still on the wax bed
Go and get a cocktail
Let me trim your scruff now
Spaaaarrrky
Gotta shave the nutbag
Gotta trim the chest hair
Sparrrrrrrrrrrrkyyyyyyyy

and the dream says
I am smooth
and the shaving cream has flowed
now it looks huge standing on edge
well, at least there is some stuble left
for the abrasion
for the abrasion
oooooo that sensation
oooooo that sensation

sparky

10-25-2005, 08:18 PM

now it looks huge standing on edge
:shocked:

:lol: :laugh: :lol: :laugh:

irishgrl

10-25-2005, 08:21 PM

Strandie and Sparky are seriously demented. Nuff Said.:nod:

strandinthewind

10-25-2005, 08:22 PM

Strandie and Sparky are seriously demented. Nuff Said.:nod:

Hello - men are fascinated with one thing and one thing only - you know that - and when ya put a bunch of them together, the topic rarely strays :laugh:

sara1998

10-25-2005, 08:24 PM

a regular day to day BC pill helps stop fertilization in addition to stopping implantation (if it occurs) but with the morning after pill, only implantation is prohibited... so if a woman had unprotected sex and the egg was fertilized and she took the morning after pill, implantation would be stopped and the pregnancy would never progress, the fertilized egg dissolve or be shed with the monthly cycle...
I know all that, honey. I'm just saying, the end result is ultimately the same. No pregnancy.

GateandGarden

10-25-2005, 08:24 PM

My problem with the war over Roe v. Wade, is that a vocal minority (and it is still a minority) is attempting to push THEIR version of morality on the rest of us. My spiritual philosophy believes that what makes a being "alive" is his/her SOUL, not just the mere fact of breathing.

So the issue would then be, when does a soul enter a body? at first breath? within the first few months? Many cultures wait a certain length of time before "welcoming" a newborn into the world, because they believe the soul isnt "fixed" into the body until then. Some souls change their minds and depart (crib death?)

If you believe in Reincarnation (as I do) you would know that you will live again, and I cant imagine any spirit entering a body destined for imminent death....at any rate, I certainly DONT want another person's morality shoved down my throat via the laws of this country. That isnt right and is just one example why we need to insist on separation of Church and State. No mandatory prayer in classrooms, no "under God" in the pledge, leave Roe v. Wade ALONE, teach SCIENCE in the classrooms, not worked over Bible stories....GAD!I agree that we shouldn't push morality onto people. However I still don't quite understand when life begins. As you've demonstrated, we still don't have a definitive explanation for that. I'm thinking perhaps we can't? It's different for different people and different cultures, so what is murder to me is not murder to someone else and vice versa. What I perceive as murder is significant to me but doesn't have much, if anything, to do with the laws of our land.

Is this making sense? Feel free to tell me if it's not. There's someone talking to me right now and that makes it more difficult to wax philosophical.

GateandGarden

10-25-2005, 08:27 PM

it didnt sound like you were on THIS topic, my mistake :distress: :sorry: by the way, I edited that other post.
however, since you quoted me, it will now live on in INFAMY~ (thanks a heap!)Oh, sorry that I quoted you and then you edited it. :sorry: I didn't mean to do that.

I like to think that I am a hell of a lot more open-minded than people who are holding signs up at abortion clinics or threatening to shoot abortion doctors (or actually doing it). Even when I was pro-life, I had no desire to do that. (And that is an understatement). But I don't mean to run it into the ground.

irishgrl

10-25-2005, 08:31 PM

Oh, sorry that I quoted you and then you edited it. :sorry: I didn't mean to do that.

I like to think that I am a hell of a lot more open-minded than people who are holding signs up at abortion clinics or threatening to shoot abortion doctors (or actually doing it). Even when I was pro-life, I had no desire to do that. (And that is an understatement). But I don't mean to run it into the ground.
which was the spirit of my original comment, that since you were recalling your pro-life days, at least you werent as radical as some of them are.....

at any rate, the true debate is over when life begins, and to me there is a big difference between a having a heartbeat and being sentient.

sparky

10-25-2005, 08:32 PM

I agree that we shouldn't push morality onto people. However I still don't quite understand when life begins. As you've demonstrated, we still don't have a definitive explanation for that. I'm thinking perhaps we can't? It's different for different people and different cultures, so what is murder to me is not murder to someone else and vice versa. What I perceive as murder is significant to me but doesn't have much, if anything, to do with the laws of our land.

Is this making sense? Feel free to tell me if it's not. There's someone talking to me right now and that makes it more difficult to wax philosophical.

That is the root of the problem right there. You cannot definitively know when it begins. It is a gray area, scientifically, and an impossible area spiritually. Even if there is scientific proof of some sort, people will hoot about holler about it anyway. I mean, you could carbon date the shroud of friggin Turin and prove with all available science that it is only 700 years old and people would say the scientific results are just a test of faith :laugh: Which is why these arguments will rage on and on and on. Spirituality and logic are almost diametrically opposed.

irishgrl

10-25-2005, 08:34 PM

Hello - men are fascinated with one thing and one thing only - you know that - and when ya put a bunch of them together, the topic rarely strays :laugh:
well, it certainly makes for hilarious reading :nod: :]

GateandGarden

10-25-2005, 08:36 PM

which was the spirit of my original comment, that since you were recalling your pro-life days, at least you werent as radical as some of them are.....Thankfully because those people can be so annoying! I feel the exact same way about capital punishment that they feel about abortion and I'm not nearly as obnoxious about it.

at any rate, the true debate is over when life begins, and to me there is a big difference between a having a heartbeat and being sentient.If that is the debate, how can we get anywhere when no one seems to agree on that?

sara1998

10-25-2005, 08:36 PM

irishgrl

10-25-2005, 08:38 PM

That is the root of the problem right there. You cannot definitively know when it begins. It is a gray area, scientifically, and an impossible area spiritually. Even if there is scientific proof of some sort, people will hoot about holler about it anyway. I mean, you could carbon date the shroud of friggin Turin and prove with all available science that it is only 700 years old and people would say the scientific results are just a test of faith :laugh: Which is why these arguments will rage on and on and on. Spirituality and logic are almost diametrically opposed.
I just read something that said Da Vinci produced the Shroud of Turin as a joke on the Church! Something tells me he would have fit right in amongst our eclectic group!

anyway, Sparky, your post is very well put, and again, it highlights why the Church and State MUST be separate.

amber

10-25-2005, 08:39 PM

That is the root of the problem right there. You cannot definitively know when it begins. It is a gray area, scientifically, and an impossible area spiritually. Even if there is scientific proof of some sort, people will hoot about holler about it anyway. I mean, you could carbon date the shroud of friggin Turin and prove with all available science that it is only 700 years old and people would say the scientific results are just a test of faith :laugh: Which is why these arguments will rage on and on and on. Spirituality and logic are almost diametrically opposed.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y12/antisnark/dilbut.jpg

GateandGarden

10-25-2005, 08:39 PM

Jessica Leigh

10-25-2005, 08:43 PM

I know all that, honey. I'm just saying, the end result is ultimately the same. No pregnancy.

ok... well i was just saying that some people believe that the morning after pill is killing an already formed child simply because an egg was fertilized and that regular BC pills are ok because a child (or any kind of organism) never forms

irishgrl

10-25-2005, 08:45 PM

Thankfully because those people can be so annoying! I feel the exact same way about capital punishment that they feel about abortion and I'm not nearly as obnoxious about it.

If that is the debate, how can we get anywhere when no one seems to agree on that?

That is why it is wise to let everyone handle their own affairs...we must each act according to our OWN conscience, because after all, we are only all responsible for our OWN actions.

I tell you, it is a very dangerous road this country seems to be embarking on...
Big Brother is not that far away after all....

GateandGarden

10-25-2005, 08:47 PM

I tell you, it is a very dangerous road this country seems to be embarking on...
Big Brother is not that far away after all....I know. :distress:

sparky

10-25-2005, 08:49 PM

anyway, Sparky, your post is very well put, and again, it highlights why the Church and State MUST be separate.

Precisely. You get into trouble trying to legislate gray areas.

sparky

10-25-2005, 08:52 PM

This is very well said. It doesn't sit well with me, either. For me, personally, abortion would not be a choice. It's something I personally would not do. But, that's my right to choice, and, who am I to tell someone else what they can or cannot do? Women have a right to choose.

I don't know that I could choose it myself. But then again, I don't have a uterus. If I did, I'd keep any and all sperm a safe distance from it unless I wanted to be pregnant. I think. But as I said, I don't have one.

Brwn_eyes0511

10-25-2005, 08:53 PM

Good points.

Uh, Brandon? :shrug:

You rang?

I thought that was the point of religion, to explain what science can't.

BTW. I don't think the Shroud of Turin is authentic, but I feel that if it is a tool to help people feel closer to the Lord, then more power to them! And I also don't find it "funny" to make fun of those who do believe it to be authentic...it only shows once stupidity.

I do think the Tilma of Guadalupe is real however.

irishgrl

10-25-2005, 08:54 PM

I don't know that I could choose it myself. But then again, I don't have a uterus. If I did, I'd keep any and all sperm a safe distance from it unless I wanted to be pregnant. I think. But as I said, I don't have one.
you must have the self control of a SAINT! Us Gals have hormones (read: sex drive) too ya know!

irishgrl

10-25-2005, 08:55 PM

.it only shows once stupidity.
Geez.....that was too easy! AHEM: it only shows one's stupidity. we mustnt type phonetically my dear :)

strandinthewind

10-25-2005, 08:55 PM

you must have the self control of a SAINT! Us Gals have hormones (read: sex drive) too ya know!

Well, I think the point was his spermatooza ain't swinning in nothing that has a uterus - so the temptation is nil.

sparky

10-25-2005, 08:58 PM

you must have the self control of a SAINT! Us Gals have hormones (read: sex drive) too ya know!

Well, considering the fact that sex has meant the risk of death for me since I was 16 and the happy HIV situation has been going on, I have been in a very similar situation. If we wanna make the stretch of equating my risk of infection to that of the risk of pregnancy, I will be up for canonization soon.
Sperm....on me....okay...in me...NEVER.:laugh:

irishgrl

10-25-2005, 08:58 PM

I thought that was the point of religion, to explain what science can't.

BTW. I don't think the Shroud of Turin is authentic, but I feel that if it is a tool to help people feel closer to the Lord, then more power to them! And I also don't find it "funny" to make fun of those who do believe it to be authentic...it only shows once stupidity.

I do think the Tilma of Guadalupe is real however.

ok: The POINT of religion is to connect with the creator. Period.

Nobody is making fun of those who think the shroud is authentic, all I said was that Leonardo made it to dupe the Church. Im sure he's pleased with himself, wherever he is....
I also believe that there are authentic miracles and visions and whatnot. History is full of them, and I think they still happen. I never said otherwise.

irishgrl

10-25-2005, 09:00 PM

Well, I think the point was his spermatooza ain't swinning in nothing that has a uterus - so the temptation is nil.
really? I thot he said if he had a uterus, he'd keep sperm far away........hmmm
good thing you aint a proofreader my friend!

Brwn_eyes0511

10-25-2005, 09:00 PM

ok: The POINT of religion is to connect with the creator. Period.

Nobody is making fun of those who think the shroud is authentic, all I said was that Leonardo made it to dupe the Church. Im sure he's pleased with himself, wherever he is....
I also believe that there are authentic miracles and visions and whatnot. History is full of them, and I think they still happen. I never said otherwise.

I wasn't talking to you specifically. ;) :wavey:

strandinthewind

10-25-2005, 09:01 PM

really? I thot he said if he had a uterus, he'd keep sperm far away........hmmm
good thing you aint a proofreader my friend!

He was using hyperbole. But, he explained himself :wavey:

irishgrl

10-25-2005, 09:03 PM

He was using hyperbole. But, he explained himself :wavey:
yes he did, and you missed it :]

strandinthewind

10-25-2005, 09:05 PM

yes he did, and you missed it :]

You honestly thought he was being sincere in saying he in reality never let his sperm near a uterus and that he liked uterus. I did not get that because he likes a big ole di*k instead. But, if you got that a uterus was temptation for him, so be it.

sparky

10-25-2005, 09:08 PM

I did not get that because he likes a big ole di*k instead.

Among other things. :wavey:

And for the record the adjective "big ole" isn't an absolute requirement. I can't have my untarnished rep slandered here.:lol:

irishgrl

10-25-2005, 09:08 PM

You honestly thought he was being sincere in saying he in reality never let his sperm near a uterus and that he liked uterus. I did not get that because he likes a big ole di*k instead. But, if you got that a uterus was temptation for him, so be it.
Jason Jason Jason.......I swear sometimes I dont KNOW what you are smokin!
I didnt say that at ALL. I merely noted that Sparky commented that if he had a uterus he'd keep all sperm far away. Go back and reread! I think we see a pattern here! No wonder you keep arguing with me, you consistently MIS-INTERPRET what I say and you put stuff in that I never said! Good Grief!

strandinthewind

10-25-2005, 09:09 PM

Among other things. :wavey:

And for the record the adjective "big ole" isn't an absolute requirement. I can't have my untarnished rep slandered here.:lol:

Hmmmmmmmm -- size queens and liars :laugh:

strandinthewind

10-25-2005, 09:10 PM

Jason Jason Jason.......I swear sometimes I dont KNOW what you are smokin!
I didnt say that at ALL. I merely noted that Sparky commented that if he had a uterus he'd keep all sperm far away. Go back and reread! I think we see a pattern here! No wonder you keep arguing with me, you consistently MIS-INTERPRET what I say and you put stuff in that I never said! Good Grief!

Then, there ya have it.

GateandGarden

10-25-2005, 11:00 PM

I thought that was the point of religion, to explain what science can't.
If that is what it means to you...

but what does that really have to do with the point? What does it have to do with the law? Specifically in terms of abortion? Somehow, the whole purpose of this was lost, I'm thinking.

Brwn_eyes0511

10-25-2005, 11:07 PM

If that is what it means to you...

but what does that really have to do with the point? What does it have to do with the law? Specifically in terms of abortion? Somehow, the whole purpose of this was lost, I'm thinking.

Well although I have religious reason why I oppose abortion. There are NON religious reasons for being Pro-Life.

GateandGarden

10-25-2005, 11:12 PM

There are NON religious reasons for being Pro-Life.Let's have 'em.

Brwn_eyes0511

10-25-2005, 11:25 PM

Let's have 'em.

I'm busy talking to Ken...

http://members.tripod.com/~joseromia/atheism.html

read the above link! It does a pretty good job of explaining. :cool:

GateandGarden

10-25-2005, 11:43 PM

I'm busy talking to Ken...

http://members.tripod.com/~joseromia/atheism.html

read the above link! It does a pretty good job of explaining. :cool:Um...I was waiting for her to explain these "medical, legal, and scientific" arguments against abortion but then it was over. :confused: She goes for an emotional impact, saying that abortionists are "prenatal hitmen," but even when I was pro-life I would have found that to be more amusing than anything else.

Of course as an atheist she can argue why it would be wrong to take a life; I figured as much. But she's not addressing the "when life begins" issue, which is the heart of the matter, the gray area of which sparky spoke. She doesn't even try to explain why an embryo or a fetus is the equivalent to a baby. :shrug:

And she's still talking about beliefs. She explains the belief of some that there is nothing after this life and she then goes on to say that laws should be made accordingly. This seems like the same thing as a Christian saying that laws should be made to adhere to and cater to his or her belief system.

She does have a good argument (IMO) as to why a particular person, specifically a non-religious and non-spiritual person would want to choose not to have an abortion.

Overall, it felt like one of those moments in English class when I ask the professor a question and she just dances around the subject for fifteen minutes, answering lots of questions other than mine because she doesn't know the answer to my particular question.

So do you have a new boyfriend?

dissention

10-25-2005, 11:45 PM

I'm busy talking to Ken...

http://members.tripod.com/~joseromia/atheism.html

read the above link! It does a pretty good job of explaining. :cool:

I thought it did a pretty poor job of explaining, especially considering it was all opinion and personal belief, nothing else.

GateandGarden

10-25-2005, 11:47 PM

I thought it did a pretty poor job of explaining, especially considering it was all opinion and personal belief, nothing else.That would be the short and better version of what I said. :laugh:

dissention

10-25-2005, 11:49 PM

That would be the short and better version of what I said. :laugh:

:laugh:

The whole premise of it was laughable. "Why Should Atheists Be Pro-Life?" I don't know, tell me, because you certainly didn't in that thing. I particularly loved the way she tried to lay the guilt trip on the reader because of her bad experiences with abortion.

sparky

10-25-2005, 11:50 PM

:laugh:

The whole premise of it was laughable. "Why Should Atheists Be Pro-Life?" I don't know, tell me, because you certainly didn't in that thing. I particularly loved the way she tried to lay the guilt trip on the reader because of her bad experiences.

Big surprise.

GateandGarden

10-25-2005, 11:51 PM

I particularly loved the way she tried to lay the guilt trip on the reader because of her bad experiences with abortion.Yeah, that was really annoying.

Honestly, Brandon, I was going into reading that hoping that something would be compelling but nothing was. Really. I actually tried. :shrug: I don't see how you could think there are valid arguments there.

Brwn_eyes0511

10-25-2005, 11:52 PM

So do you have a new boyfriend?[/COLOR]

Can't a guy just TALK! :laugh:

Brwn_eyes0511

10-25-2005, 11:54 PM

Yeah, that was really annoying.

Honestly, Brandon, I was going into reading that hoping that something would be compelling but nothing was. Really. I actually tried. :shrug: I don't see how you could think there are valid arguments there.

Well I thought it was good...I'll post more stuff...

http://brindedcow.umd.edu/140/marquis.html

What about that one! I'm sure it won't be good enough! lol

GateandGarden

10-25-2005, 11:57 PM

Well I thought it was good...I'll post more stuff...

http://brindedcow.umd.edu/140/marquis.html

What about that one! I'm sure it won't be good enough! lolWhy don't you try to explain it? You said there were secular reasons for being pro-life? Why don't you articulate them?

I'll read this one, too. My computer is insanely slow but it'll come up at some point.

HOW could you think the last one was good??? There were no facts whatsoever and it didn't even go anywhere. It didn't explain things; it left them in mid-air.

dissention

10-25-2005, 11:58 PM

Well I thought it was good...I'll post more stuff...

http://brindedcow.umd.edu/140/marquis.html

What about that one! I'm sure it won't be good enough! lol

He explicitly uses his own standard of morality in his argument. Morality is, as you know, a subjective thing.

Brwn_eyes0511

10-25-2005, 11:59 PM

Why don't you try to explain it? You said there were secular reasons for being pro-life? Why don't you articulate them?

I'll read this one, too. My computer is insanely slow but it'll come up at some point.

HOW could you think the last one was good??? There were no facts whatsoever and it didn't even go anywhere. It didn't explain things; it left them in mid-air.

It was something! I'll compose an argument later! This isn't all that important to me right now. I mean geez...everyone here knows where I stand on the issue, it is sort of pointless for me to even post in this thread!

dissention

10-26-2005, 12:01 AM

everyone here knows where I stand on the issue

Precisely. All of this is pointless. But so is life and we all keep going, day after day. :laugh:

Brwn_eyes0511

10-26-2005, 12:02 AM

Precisely. All of this is pointless. But so is life and we all keep going, day after day. :laugh:

Now that is just not true!

:distress: You do this on purpose! lol :laugh:

GateandGarden

10-26-2005, 12:05 AM

He explicitly uses his own standard of morality in his argument. Morality is, as you know, a subjective thing.That was my take on it as well. It may as well have been religious.

dissention

10-26-2005, 12:06 AM

Now that is just not true!

That's a matter of opinion.

:distress: You do this on purpose! lol :laugh:

Someone has to balance out the craziness coming from your keyboard. :laugh:

GateandGarden

10-26-2005, 12:07 AM

It was something! I'll compose an argument later! This isn't all that important to me right now. I mean geez...everyone here knows where I stand on the issue, it is sort of pointless for me to even post in this thread!If you don't post in this thread, then it's nothing but "I agree with you" and "wow, you said that so well," and on and on.

Beyond that I suppose it is pointless.

I know you'd rather be talking to your new boyfriend. ;)

Brwn_eyes0511

10-26-2005, 12:09 AM

That's a matter of opinion.

I suppose it is!

Someone has to balance out the craziness coming from your keyboard. :laugh:

And of course that has to be you!!!!

We battle more than Jason and Irishgirl!

I wouldn't have it any other way that! From one wing to another wing...God (or dust particles) bless you! :nod: :lol:

Brwn_eyes0511

10-26-2005, 12:11 AM

If you don't post in this thread, then it's nothing but "I agree with you" and "wow, you said that so well," and on and on.

Beyond that I suppose it is pointless.

So you do like my "right-wing" a** don't you!? :xoxo:

I know you'd rather be talking to your new boyfriend. ;)

You are too much! :laugh:

The Tower

10-26-2005, 12:30 AM

Can't a guy just TALK! :laugh:
I'm so much more interested to find out that your boyfriend really gets into your whole groove. I mean, the blossom of first love, the realization of fulfilling one's desires. The whole nine yards.

dissention

10-26-2005, 12:31 AM

I suppose it is!

And of course that has to be you!!!!

We battle more than Jason and Irishgirl!

I wouldn't have it any other way that! From one wing to another wing...God (or dust particles) bless you! :nod: :lol:

"God" won't be blessing me anytime soon, you can keep him for yourself.

Brwn_eyes0511

10-26-2005, 12:53 AM

I'm so much more interested to find out that your boyfriend really gets into your whole groove. I mean, the blossom of first love, the realization of fulfilling one's desires. The whole nine yards.

oh dear! :laugh:

strandinthewind

10-26-2005, 09:01 AM

. . . We battle more than Jason and Irishgirl! . . . .

Well, I am never flying from Edinburgh to Dublin in a Hot Air Ballon with your, Mary (Irishgirl) , Tower, and my two Scottie bitches while we all, including the Scotties, wear kilts and tams. Then again, instead of singing (Scotties included) like Tolkien elves - we could bitch at you the whole way and hold you out of the balloon by your ankles until you see the light. Of course, Mary has little patience and may drop you into the jaws of a dragon :cool:

Brwn_eyes0511

10-26-2005, 09:04 AM

Well, I am never flying from Edinburgh to Dublin in a Hot Air Ballon with your, Mary (Irishgirl) , Tower, and my two Scottie bitches while we all, including the Scotties, wear kilts and tams. Then again, instead of singing (Scotties included) like Tolkien elves - we could bitch at you the whole way and hold you out of the balloon by your ankles until you see the light. Of course, Mary has little patience and may drop you into the jaws of a dragon :cool:

And the whole way I shall scream..."We should invade their countries kill their leaders and convert them to christianity!" :lol:

strandinthewind

10-26-2005, 09:08 AM

And the whole way I shall scream..."We should invade their countries kill their leaders and convert them to christianity!" :lol:

That will promote putting a red hot poker somewhere - and please be reminded Mary is not one who suffers foolish males very well.

Brwn_eyes0511

10-26-2005, 09:09 AM

That will promote putting a red hot poker somewhere - and please be reminded Mary is not one who suffers foolish males very well.

Ouch! :o

You guys are so violent! :D :lol:

irishgrl

10-26-2005, 04:17 PM

That will promote putting a red hot poker somewhere - and please be reminded Mary is not one who suffers foolish males very well.
Jason! how you DO go on!! :D
(I just want to say I made an exception in YOUR case :] )

strandinthewind

10-26-2005, 04:19 PM

Jason! how you DO go on!! :D

I didn't say whose poker did I :laugh: and he apparently likes that now or at least is in lust with macfanken (and who can blame him :laugh: ) - soooooooo we need to find a new method of punishment.

On edit - thanks for the exception - I think :laugh:

irishgrl

10-26-2005, 04:26 PM

I didn't say whose poker did I :laugh: and he apparently likes that now or at least is in lust with macfanken (and who can blame him :laugh: ) - soooooooo we need to find a new method of punishment.

On edit - thanks for the exception - I think :laugh:
Hmmmm maybe I should just hie meself over to the ledgie crush thread to see if there is a pic of macfanken (or Brandon for that matter) so I can see for meself what all the hoopla is aboot!:nod:

As for a new method of punishment........whatever it is, we should apply it LIBERALLY :lol:

Brwn_eyes0511

10-26-2005, 05:05 PM

Hmmmm maybe I should just hie meself over to the ledgie crush thread to see if there is a pic of macfanken (or Brandon for that matter) so I can see for meself what all the hoopla is aboot!:nod:

As for a new method of punishment........whatever it is, we should apply it LIBERALLY :lol:

We (Ken an dI) are both really hot dear! :D

Neal

10-26-2005, 05:07 PM

We (Ken an dI) are both really hot dear! :D

I'm sure you'll make beautiful babies! Oh, wait... :p

BTW, where is Ken in all of this? :confused:

ontheEdgeof17

10-26-2005, 05:09 PM

We (Ken an dI) are both really hot dear! :D

You have no chance.

Brwn_eyes0511

10-26-2005, 05:18 PM

You have no chance.

Oh f*ck off! :lol:

Brwn_eyes0511

10-26-2005, 05:19 PM

I'm sure you'll make beautiful babies! Oh, wait... :p

BTW, where is Ken in all of this? :confused:

Working...I think anyways.

He said he thought it was all funny! He'll join us later I'm sure.

ontheEdgeof17

10-26-2005, 05:21 PM

Oh f*ck off! :lol:

But just for your fantasies....I can always describe how he kisses and looks in his underwear. :laugh:

Sorry if I am embarassing you, Ken. :o

Neal

10-26-2005, 05:22 PM

But just for your fantasies....I can always describe how he kisses and looks in his underwear. :laugh:

Mmmm... please continue! :woohoo:

Brwn_eyes0511

10-26-2005, 05:27 PM

But just for your fantasies....I can always describe how he kisses and looks in his underwear. :laugh:

Sorry if I am embarassing you, Ken. :o

Well now. We will just see about that! I love being wealthy...the price of plane tickers just don't matter! :)

But feel free to describe the kissing and underwear.

ontheEdgeof17

10-26-2005, 05:29 PM

Well now. We will just see about that! I love being wealthy...the price of plane tickers just don't matter! :)

Not that I don't want him, but you can take 'em. I don't battle over guys. :)

sparky

10-26-2005, 05:33 PM

Not that I don't want him, but you can take 'em. I don't battle over guys. :)

Didn't Stevie once say,"I won't fight for a man and I won't fight for a place on that stage, either !" ?

Brwn_eyes0511

10-26-2005, 05:34 PM

Not that I don't want him, but you can take 'em. I don't battle over guys. :)

Well now, that is no fun! Jesus...

I have battled over girls before and I thought I was going to have my first battle over a guy!

Party Pooper! :p :laugh:

ontheEdgeof17

10-26-2005, 05:36 PM

Well now, that is no fun! Jesus...

I have battled over girls before and I thought I was going to have my first battle over a guy!

Party Pooper! :p :laugh:

No need to battle. He doesn't date Repubs.

Neal

10-26-2005, 05:36 PM

Well now, that is no fun! Jesus...

I have battled over girls before and I thought I was going to have my first battle over a guy!

Party Pooper! :p :laugh:

*Sigh*. If it'll make you feel better I'll fight you for him... :rolleyes:

But no biting or hair pulling, bitch! :p

The Tower

10-26-2005, 05:59 PM

...I can always describe how he kisses and looks in his underwear...
And out of them.... ;)

Brwn_eyes0511

10-26-2005, 06:07 PM

No need to battle. He doesn't date Repubs.

Ahh. There is the thing you see. He said he didn't mind SLEEPING with them, just not dating! And I really am a NICE person if you were to know me outside of this computer screen!

DavidMn

10-26-2005, 06:27 PM

Well, now this thread is getting quite ribald....:laugh: