Should Congress pass a resolution that labels the World War I-era killings of Armenians genocide?
Yes 33% 1996
No 67% 3977
Total Votes: 5973

WOW! While many believe that the US government should be tried for war crimes for having “invaded” Iraq, ONLY 33% – imagine that THIRTY THREE PERCENT think that the genocide of Armenians should be counted as a crime. I mean, not only those people were invaded, but they were chased out of their country or killed if they did not want to submit/convert to a muslim regime. I know! – one of my friend is Armenian born and most of her family (grandparents and relatives) had to flee at the time because of that. What an upside down world we live in!!!

I am married without any children at this point. When I do have children I intend to teach them what I have learned.

Song of Songs (or Song of Solomon) is one of the best presentations of sexuality and romance that I have seen. The language is very passionate and romantic. Two of the biggest themes in the book are “Do not waken love before it is time”, and “when it is time drink deeply!” It is clearly talking about sexual and romantic love.

I wasn’t taught “abstinence only.” I was taught “this thing is worth waiting for until marriage.”

It was worth the wait, for certain.

I do not support, however, teaching young people “you cannot be responsible and control yourself anyway so you might as well just use a condom.” There is a grain of truth there. If you are going to be irresponsible or immoral at least attempt to provide bringing a child into the scene.

I would support teaching them everything they need to know to make wise adult decisions about sexuality. This includes the benefits of waiting until marriage and making “birth control” decisions with your spouse.

I know we cannot stop some from choosing sex outside of marriage. But if someone makes that choice, I desire that they have at least been presented with the benefits of waiting!

*****

The effectiveness of a condom is dependent greatly on it’s proper use.

“How effective are condoms at preventing pregnancy?

The breakage rate for condoms is two out of 100. Of every 100 couples who use condoms incorrectly and inconsistently, 15 will experience a pregnancy during the first year of use. Of every 100 couples who use condoms correctly and consistently, only two will experience a pregnancy.”

This quote is taken from mayoclinic.com

*****

James Dobson – Discrimination and Child Abuse? I have also read his stuff and have seen neither.

*****

I read the article about the guy from the “faith based initiative” office who has changed his mind about faith and politics.

Some of my thoughts on the role of “faith” in “politics” can be found here.

*****

I still see no connection between the concept of “a war of aggression” and the war in Iraq. As far as I can see the second Iraq war was merely a conclusion of the first and an inevitable outcome if Saddam Hussein refused to cooperate and prove he had no WMDs.

I will agree with you that telling people the benefits of waiting until marriage has never caused an abortion, that’s true. The problem is that most people telling their kids that aren’t telling their kids anything else. Now if you personally have been able to use the training you received to avoid sex, and you are happy about this, then good for you. I’m glad it works for you (so far). What percentage of your peers do you think have had equal success? Do you think it’s 98%? Do you think 2% of your peers having unprotected sex is a good idea? Unprotected sex is all they know to have, because nobody told them the other possibilities, and they wind up on the table. That’s just how it is, and the statistics prove it.

It does sound like you had a relatively decent, if somewhat slanted, schooling in sex ed. If everyone got this it would not be so bad. The issue is that so many advocate abstinence ONLY, with no discussion of anything else. A certain percentage of teens will have sex no matter what you do. Doesn’t it make sense to teach them how to pretect themselves?

About the president that you defend while he laughs at you ( look here: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/10/14/60minutes/main2089778.shtml ). If we’re going to discuss a war of aggression, let’s first define the term:

“Waging a war of aggression is a crime under customary international law and refers to any war not out of self-defense or sanctioned by Article 51 of the UN Charter”.

Ok, that seems clear enough.
Well obviously Iraq was not self defense, in that we were not attacked by Iraq, and had no reason to believe that we would be attacked by Iraq. Let’s see what Article 51 says:
Article 51 – Security Council not impair rights of member states
Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.

There’s that “right of self defense” language again.

Now listen closely, please. There are only 2 ways that a nation goes to war. Either it is attacked, making it’s operations defensive in nature and therefore legal, or it attacks first, making it’s operations aggressive in nature and therefore not sanctioned by international law. The initiation of such a war is a war crime under international law, under the Geneva accords and under the Nuremberg Principles. Congress voted to give the Pretzeldent authority to do what he wanted, which was stupid – but GWB gave the order. Again, He CHOSE to initiate a war against a country that had not attacked us.

Yes, Hussein attacked Kuwait, 12 years before we invaded Iraq this time. (Our previous efforts in Iraq were in defense of an ally and in full concordance with international law BTW.). What has that got to do with our invasion this time. As I just said (but you obviously didn’t read or couldn’t be bothered to fact check) the inspectors were there in compliance with the resolutions, and they were inspecting, in compliance with the resolutions, and they weren’t finding anything. GWB had them leave for their own safety, because he was about to blast the place whether they had anything or not. One more time – He CHOSE to initiate a war against a country that had not attacked us.

You claim James Dobson, interesting. I’ve read his stuff. I’m sorry to hear that you were schooled in the teachings of an advocate of discrimination and child abuse. I’m just now realizing how amazingly “Conservative” you really are. Wow. I’m Ward Cleaver by comparison.

Part 1)
A blind person crossing the street… A woman getting an abortion. Hmm. Yes, let’s make sure the woman knows and clearly understands what stage of development the baby is at and that she is allowing a human life, her child, to be killed. Full information is very important.

I want to a small, moneyless private Christian school when I was younger. We received a very quality “sex education.” Mostly through books that the school sent home and we were able to discuss with our parents. I also read good stuff from James Dobson.

I understood how pregnancy happened and how diseases were spread. I understood how a condom reduces chances of both pregnancy and disease, but how it prevents neither.

I learned things about coping with hormones and emotions.

I learned about God’s highest plan for the best sex possible, within marriage, and was invited to wait until marriage to engage in sex.

This is the education I would wish on all children.

I would also like to see opportunities for young people to be healed on the inside so that the emotional forces driving them to reckless sex have a chance to be dealt with.

Sexual desire is a good thing. We are all responsible for what we do with it.

Every single individual involved with an abortion is responsible for that choice.

And telling people the benefits of waiting until marriage has not caused one abortion. Not even one. Never. It never will. I find the connection ridiculous and unbelievable.

Part 2)
Saddam Hussein attacked Kuwait. The free world came to Kuwait’s defense and demanded the aggressor stop and also rid itself of WMDs. The burden of proof was placed on Saddam and Company to prove they were gone. They did not comply.

Whether or not attacking was a good choice is debatable.

Whether or not it is best for the U.S. and it’s allies to act as the world’s police is an excellent and important discussion. I personally don’t want anything to do with being the world’s police.

Yet you still have not proven that the war against Iraq was a war of aggression.

You have not proven that George Bush is a war criminal. Sorry.

ThirstyJon

Would I be right to say to you, as you lay dying – “Jonathan, my longtime compatriot, it takes two for a pedestrian to get hit by a bus. It takes a pedestrian and a bus driver. I was merely standing on the sidewalk. Have a nice afterlife. Can I have your stuff?”.??? Would that be cool? Would that be accurate?

Obviously not. Your logic is flawed in this case, just like your other case in which you tell young kids “Ignore the acute hormones coursing through your ripe 16 year old body screaming BREED! BREED! BREED!. Just think of Jesus and everything will be Ok”. Guess what, everything will not be Ok. This doesn’t work, and it has never worked.

Premarital sex is one of the endless constants in human history. 100 years ago young kids got married when the girl got pregnant, and then if they didn’t “learn to love each other” they lived out lives of quiet misery because divorce was unthinkable. 50 years ago young kids got married when the girl got pregnant, and then if they didn’t “learn to love each other” they later got divorced. This is one of the reasons for the enormous divorce rates that peaked in the 70′s. Nowadays when a young girl gets pregnant she has more choices. She might marry the father, she might give the baby up for adoption (these 2 are my favorites), she may raise the child herself as a “single mom”, (the 3rd best choice) or she may have an abortion.

Nobody really wants that abortion – not even we pro-choicers. We wish the kid had never gotten pregnant in the first place.

This is the wierd part about the abortion debate, Choicers and the Lifers are very close to the same page. We both wish to stop unwanted teen pregnancy and the desolation that it brings. The abortions, the dependence on welfare, the casual bastardy and fatherlessness that is bad for the moms and the kids, we both want it to stop. We just disagree on how to go about it. My side advocates education and prevention and adoption, and failing that we hold abortion to be a last resort option. Your side says “Just Say No”, which makes sense because it’s been such a successful tactic in the war on drugs. (NOT!).

Anywho – the research shows that in the aggregate, while many kids who take these abstinence pledges do not remain abstinent very long (sorry, they just don’t, and that’s not just me and my prayer group talking). They do tend to wait longer before first intercourse – but when they do slip off the wagon they do it without protection. Is this the goal? Slightly later but unprotected sex?

It just doesn’t work, and the numbers prove it. Wishing won’t make it so. Sorry.

Like the blind man on the street corner, kids don’t know what’s going on. They’re young, they’re impressionable, they’re inexperienced, they’re kids. As adults, it’s out job to guide them. Guidance can take many forms – and frankly, if you want to tell your kids to never think about their “dirty parts” that’s your choice, and good luck with it. But leave my kids the H#ll alone. (Mine are 18F and 17M BTW, doing very well thank you, great kids).

About your feckless leader. Shortly before the invasion, Bush told the inspectors to get out for their own safety. They were there, and they were inspecting. They weren’t finding anything, because there was nothing to be found.

Tell me this. In January of 2003, were you laying awake at night, trembling with fear that Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi army were about to attack America? Did you really think this nimrod had the Motive, the Means and the Opportunity to carry out a realistic attack on the United States of America?

Enforcing UN resolutions. Interesting tack for you to take. When do you figure we’ll be attacking Israel to enforce the resolution demanding that they get out of the occupied territories? The Chinese are under UN resolution over human rights issues, let’s invade them. Shall we invade the USA for it’s obvious flaunting of the Nuclear Non-proliferation treaty? (Oh,, wait,,). When did we become the world’s cop?

At the end of the day, the fact is that there was no good reason to invade Iraq. A country that never attacked us, had no means of attacking us, and never supported those that did. That makes this sad little fiasco a war of aggression, and your boy a war criminal.

I’d bet my DD-214 on it. How about you?

1. I couldn’t read the article on virginity pledges causing abortion you referred to because it required a login. I don’t have one and don’t need anymore.

However, to preform an abortion in this nation requires participation from the mother and a doctor, and has nothing to do with a virginity pledge. Each individual is responsible for his or her own actions. There is no link in terms of responsibility between promoting abstinence until marriage and that somehow “causing” abortions. Sorry.

2. The Iraq war was not a war of aggression. Saddam Hussein aggressively attacked Kuwait. The U.S. and its allies, for whatever reasons, chose to stop him. This resulted in agreements to get rid of WMDs and prove they were gone. The Hussein government did not cooperate with providing sufficient proof. The burden of proof was on them, and they did not comply.

It is legit to discuss whether or not it was the best strategy to invade Iraq, but it was not a war of aggression. It merely enforced the things agreed upon at the end of the first gulf war. Sorry again.

ThirstyJon

“”Do you really think that we like abortion? Do you really think that we’re happy when a young woman has this done? That young Liberal girls bet preggers just for the joy of hopping up on that table?”"

Well?

First – you said: Virginity Pledges, etc. have not caused one abortion. Not even one. What in the world are you talking about on that one?

Oh yes they have. Read this from the American Journal of Sociology ( http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AJS/journal/issues/v106n4/040236/040236.html ).

“Since 1993, in response to a movement sponsored by the Southern Baptist Church, over 2.5 million adolescents have taken public “virginity” pledges, in which they promise to abstain from sex until marriage. This paper explores the effect of those pledges on the transition to first intercourse. Adolescents who pledge are much less likely to have intercourse than adolescents who do not pledge. The delay effect is substantial. On the other hand, the pledge does not work for adolescents at all ages. Second, pledging delays intercourse only in contexts where there are some, but not too many, pledgers. The pledge works because it is embedded in an identity movement. Consequently, the pledge identity is meaningful only in contexts where it is at least partially nonnormative. Consequences of pledging are explored for those who break their promise. Promise breakers are less likely than others to use contraception at first intercourse.”

Less likely to use contraception, hmmmm. What do you figure that leads to? Or do you know more about this than the Sociologists and Social Workers that work up to their elbows in this everyday.

There was no accusation against your president, there’s just a statement of fact. (he isn’t my president. He might’ve been, but he’s been spitting on me and mine for 7 years, and he’s a war criminal, so no dice).

Now about your President the war criminal, here’s a little snippet from the Nuremburg Standard, Article 6:

“CRIMES AGAINST PEACE: namely, planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression,”

(Here’s a link, in case you want to break out of your radical rightist shell and actually learn something – http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/proc/imtconst.htm (Or do you already know more about this than the faculty of Yale Law?)).

A war of aggression is the ultimate war crime, in that it contains and initiates all the other crimes. Your boy lied lied lied about WMD, links to Al Qaeda, etc. etc. and he chose, CHOSE, to initiate a war of aggression against a country that hadn’t attacked us. Now close to a million people (not fetuses, breathing people) are dead. And that makes him a war criminal.

When I say “You people” I mean “Conservatives”, usually Republican. You elected him, and he’s turned out to be the worst president in history. Congratulations.