Home - List All Discussions

Because we all know 5 year olds are having sex...

by: AshMarie88

This was posted on myspace by a friend. Utterly ridiculous. I hope this guy doesn't become president.
RE: Obama wants to teach sex-ed to kindergarteners.
----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: Abbey
Date: Jul 21, 2007 6:14 PM
He thinks sex education should be age appropriate, but would you want your 5 year old to take sex education in his kindergarten class? If that is the case my kids will for sure be home schooled. And Barack wants it all science based on top of that. I don't mind sex education being based on science, but my children will also learn what Jesus says about sex.<br /><br />http://us.video.aol.com/player/launcher?ar=us_en_video_748x541_full&mode=1&pmmsid=1944332<br /><br />Update: I just read argument for ang against this. I am hearing some people say that sex education is too teach children about touch what is appropriate and inappropriate and too not go into a strangers car. Going into a strangers car is not sex education, it is teaching children common sense. And trust me before my child is in kindergarten my child will know what kind of touching is inappropriate. My child will know to tell an adult immediately. And plus you may teach a child something, and they may know something, but often times children still do not take heed. Where does the parents' job end and the teacher's jobs come in. I want my kindergartener to learn to write, to learn basic reading and math. To learn more about sharing and socializing while in school. The rest I will teach him.

reply from: MizzCorleone

I can definitely agree with you. When my daughter is of the age when I will be sending her out in the world without my supervision, she will be well aware of appropriate and inappropriate touch and what to do in a dangerous situation like that. We are taking it too far when you want to teach a 5 y.o. sex ed. That is a very personal thing at a young age that only the parents should be talking to their children about. Sometimes I wonder what our world has come to.

reply from: coco

Hate to burst your bubble people but I found out about sex in "84" when I was in kindergarten. Now you have the internet were lord knows what people are looking at infront of thier kids!! I wish I could say "thats horriable" but sadly that is how society is!! Untill sex stops selling then kids will be "somewhat" sheltered but untill then you better start talking

reply from: 4given

Sexual education? It is up to me to teach my children- when I feel they are ready. There are enough opportunities already for the public school system to corrupt their judgement and understanding of most things. So obviously a 5 year old can not fully process that kind of information, so it has potential to corrupt their once pure thoughts. Yes, it is bound to happen one way or another, but in no way would I ever support educating them sexually at such a young age. I am accountable for my children, and with that comes the "freedom" to oversee that the taxes I have paid the public school system to educate them, aren't instead used to corrupt them. Coco- are you saying sexual education is okay for a 5 year old, because you were personally subject to it? To me, any child that has been forced to try to understand such things before their time, has been robbed of the blissful purity that is (should be) their childhood.

reply from: coco

I am teaching my children already!! My odest when he was in kindergarten in a
suburban town came home singin "Im IN LOVE WITH A STRIPPER" in those words , he didnt know what he was saying. Anyway I asked him first were did he hear that from, he told me from a kid on the bus (that is how I learned about sex in kindergarten too by the BUS, NO adult supervision that is when kids show off how cool they are with NO interuptions) Anyway so I explained to him what a stripper was when he asked what a stripper was. SADLY my child knows what a stripper is because of a kid on the bus. My point was (since I was a kid not that long ago) KIds are going to try and act cool around thier friends and curse, and talk about sex when NOW tv, video games, nicheloden shows, radio talks about sex VERY candiadly so they are GOING to ask questions, and MY method of parenting is being as TRUTHFUL with your children 100% of the time you CANT hide from sex or violence so questions are going to arise and it is MY choice and opinion to ANSWER those questions not to "put yourself out there" but to teach your children from YOUR mistakes. I dont know about you all but I like to share my struggles in life so I could prevent at least someone with a lesson so they dont have to go threw the bullSH@#

reply from: 4given

I agree with you there. When my sons have asked me any question- I answer them honestly. I will continue on w/ the discussion until they have had enough and walk away.. I have spent many hours in a K-1 classroom doing arts and crafts, and it is fair to say that a lot of these children have already been exposed to much more than they should ever have to be- I don't want sexual education pushed on my small child! I don't desire that any of my children would be subject to any teaching that I did not first approve of. We have open and honest communication in my home, and I have given them honest answers about every question thay have asked of me. Point being, it is up to me to answer their questions, but if someone else "educates" them on the school bus before I have had that opportunity, I am sure to enlighten them as they know. My sons are fully aware of what an abortion is and how a child is brutally murdered during an abortion. None of them want to see the pictures, and I would not show them until I felt they were ready. It goes along w/ it. Sexual education= abortion education. If they are old enough to be considering the pleasures of sex, than they are also old enough to see the remains of a moment of lust in an abortion photo. To me that is not a 5 year old child! (or 6-10 year old) I am willing to educate my children as they desire to know (in a passing conversation about sex etc.) but when they truly are ready, they will get the facts top to bottom on sex, disease, abortion, pregnancy etc., much of which I am certain they already have opinions on.

reply from: faithman

If there is to be any "sex ed", it should be for parents, and then parents decide what children are exposed to. "sex ed" is usually the first encounter with Planned Parenthood, and that is never a good thing. I think public schools should get out of sex ed altogether. We have evolution teaching kids they are monkies, and sex ed to teach them how to act like one.

reply from: nykaren

Ashley, What exactly does Obama want the kindergarten "sex ed" to teach? That's a very broad term, as has been pointed out already. I'd be interested in knowing specifically what he has said he wants taught. Karen

reply from: 4given

Sexual education in the schools in NH teaches them quite a bit more than the proper term for one's genitalia. They teach young boys how to put a condom on and briefly go over contraceptives and abortion. (Without truly educating them as to what an abortion is) My sons have never been told that sex is "dirty". Or we have never referred to anything in this home by any other name than what it is. Sure, they have seen animals mate. They watch National Geographic, so they have likely seen more species mate than I have. There should be no sex education in the schools for a 5 y.o. child. They have sex ed. in 4th grade here. (If a parent is not properly educating their child, chances are my sons will correct the slangs that they hear- In fact in 2nd grade, my son asked me why a classmate referred to his penis as a weaner.) Every parent- of any child being taught sex ed. should have the course outline so they can read ahead of their child. It is part of responsible parenting. I can't trust the public school system to guide them w/ the facts given- nor can I rely on a thorough explanation- things like abortion for one. (I was told it was briefly discussed as a form of birth control)

reply from: AshMarie88

I learned about sex from a VERY YOUNG age (like 4 or 5, I can't remember) however I wouldn't want MY 4 or 5 year old knowing about it for quite a while.
My mom was my sex educator basically, I asked her EVERYTHING about it when I had questions and she answered them.
I trust her more than strangers.
I won't want my future children being taught sex by anyone else but me or my future hubby.
That's MY CHOICE for MY CHILDREN, I don't care if the liberals or poor-choicers don't like it. My life, my future kids, my choice.

reply from: coco

YOu knkowo what you are COMPLETELY right ash I am NOT saying that kids should know that "the peinis goes into the vagina" talk but if they ALREADY exposed by thier peers then SURELY you must tell them! I dont think we should leave our teenagers in a "carrie" state either. Sadly some parents are not comfortable with speaking with thier children on this subject and they hope if they dont talk about it then it would go away!!

reply from: Reira

Ah, this issue came to England once also. Some school in England is teaching sex ed to youngsters just a bit older than 6 or 7 I think. The parents have the choice to take their children out of it. From what the news story told me, it was nothing in depth or sinister.
I would prefer to educate my own children on sex though whenever they ask or whenever they need correcting.. I believe it adds a bond that they will remember up to the time when their hormones will rage and if they need advice, they'll have someone on hand who they know will tell the truth.
But also there are parents who are too irresponsible to teach their children anything and its the children of these parents and the parents themselves when they were children that probably needed this education. It is very likely that these people are the reason abortion rates are high... Probably.
I agree mostly with ConcernedParent, in my belief they hit the nail on the head several times in their postings. Sex should be neither dirty nor a secret. Nor should it be allowed to be 'glammed up' as the media are making it.

reply from: Teresa18

Read what goes on in some of those sex ed classes. They teach methods of mutual masturbation, foreplay, types of lubricants, ways to have sex, all sorts of birth control, homosexual sex, etc. Studies have shown that in comprehensive sex ed, birth control is mentioned at a huge margin, and abstinence is greatly minimized. Of course abortion is most likely taught as a method of birth control if the original fails, especially when PP is teaching the courses.
This is an issue for the parents, not for the schools, especially when we are dealing with little kids, some only 5 years old. Schools can teach basic sex ed with a strong emphasis on abstinence once the kids hit middle school, but they should not be before then. Even then, there should be a consent form so parents can opt their kids out if they would prefer to teach them themselves.

reply from: coco

yes i agree with cp they will not teach the whole shabang, but think about it 5 yearolds do masterbate!! thats not out of the norm

reply from: coco

If only there was a good place where parents could read about what goes on at the playground and in little tree forts and such...That might change some minds about the need for sex ed....
AMEN CP

reply from: faithman

If there is to be any "sex ed", it should be for parents, and then parents decide what children are exposed to. "sex ed" is usually the first encounter with Planned Parenthood, and that is never a good thing. I think public schools should get out of sex ed altogether. We have evolution teaching kids they are monkies, and sex ed to teach them how to act like one.

reply from: 4given

Faithman- this is where the home school comment should have come in!

reply from: faithman

no problemo: Can anyone say home school? One of the most dangerous places to send a child is the public school system. Any parent who is truely concerned about safety, and secular humanist brain washing, of children should keep their children out of the secular humanist seminaries that pass them selfves off as educational institutions.

reply from: Teresa18

I totally agree, Faithman. I never send my kids to a public school. They will either be homeschooled or go to a Catholic or Christian school like I did.
I was on the playground at that age. We were supervised. That stuff never happened. We were supervised all the way through 8th grade recess. My cousins have gone through that stage just recently. They don't know about sex, and they never had a problem. The majority of 4 and 5 year olds have no clue about that stuff. There is no need for this stuff until middle school. Even then, parents should be able to opt out if they wish to teach their children differently.

reply from: faithman

School should be a place of learning, not a place to "hook up". I think that segrigated schools according to gender are a good thing. It is a fact that children learn better without the distraction of gender differences. Why even put children in situations they are not mature enough to handle? How can they "do it anyway" when temptation is not an option?

reply from: faithman

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<~
Did you homeschool your children?
....and that matters because....?

reply from: 4given

Yes. There's a Frank Zappa song about those Catholic girls.. I'm hoping my boys will respect me enough to speak honestly about whatever may come up. That's why the communication line is always open here- even when they don't really want to talk about things. And when the time comes, I will be sure to warn them about what really goes down at CYO.

reply from: 4given

I have attended private Christian schools and academies, and that is where I found the peak of rebelliousness. I won't disagree w/ you, except to say that at Catholic or Christian scools, one is also taught chastity and fear of God and His teachings on sexual immorality. It doesn't mean it will happen less or more- All are tempted. All have lust. I don't think sending my sons off to a private school to spare them from sexual corruption would be valid in and of itself. I just warn them about what's out there and instruct them as to the facts- as they are ready or have heard.

reply from: 4given

CP- So you were one of those boys my parents always warned me about! Now that you have daughters I am sure you find parenting quite interesting when it comes to boys and sex, right? It would be hard for my boys to pull one over on me, so I assume you have had some experience there already having teenagers.

reply from: 4given

Apparently you are doing more than something right. you said they trust you, and that is what I want my sons to fully realize- that they can trust me and be honest about whatever it is they are going through.. Nevermind you have been rearing them on your own- I so respect single parents! I expected that you would say you should have been warned about them- (those Catholic girls) I have known many- I will warn my boys! Your willingness to provide BC to them- shows that you are trying to encourage responsible behavior. Many don't agree, I know, but every child is different, as every parent. You are doing everything right there!

reply from: AshMarie88

And you know this for fact how?
How many 5 year olds do you know that do that?
I'm not denying it but it's not too common that I know of.

reply from: AshMarie88

I was homeschooled from 4th grade up until my very last day of 12th grade, and I'm doing well so far!
There's nothing at all wrong with homeschool. I don't know why people give it such a bad wrap.

reply from: Teresa18

Of course not. While the girls may have been interested in boys, they went out on dates, but it was generally as a group. There were a lot of people that didn't have full awareness of what sex was when we learned about it in the 6th grade. The actual talk of making out and going farther came around late 7th grade into 8th grade.
I agree that there are Catholic School girls that don't follow the teachings of the Church, but I graduated last year and always have. Only one person out of 170 some ended up pregnant sophmore year, and she was always wild anyway.
I don't think that's fair. The actual margin of abuse is relatively small in comparison to the size of the Church. What happened was wrong, but a lot of the cases weren't full blown pedophilia, either. Many of the boys were in their teens. This was more like epedophilia. Regardless, sexual abuse is wrong. What those priests did was wrong, and the problem stems from not following the teachings of the Church on their part. Of course then it was mishandled by some of the bishops who thought sending them to "treatment" for a couple weeks and sending them to another parish was sufficient. All in all, it was a big mess, and I am very happy they are cleaning it up. I hope it never happens again.
Sex wasn't repressed. We learned what we were supposed to know, and we came out just as smart or smarter than the kids at the public schools.

reply from: coco

And you know this for fact how?
How many 5 year olds do you know that do that?
I'm not denying it but it's not too common that I know of.
Ash I am not TRYING to sound mean but you have no kids, it is VERY common for boys and girls to touch themselves becuase it "feels good" its called "self examination" for gods sake my 7 & 5 yearolds do it all the time, and at that age they have "boners" (sorry for the term the medical one slipped my mind). When they do "rubb" on themselves it is not a "NASTY" thing it is part of "growing up".

reply from: coco

For tresa and ash
http://kidshealth.org/parent/emotions/feelings/sex.html

reply from: AshMarie88

Well personally I never did when I was that small, I was too concerned with playing with my friends and playing with barbies and other such things.
Not ALL kids do, even if there are some that do.

reply from: faithman

The only time small children get "sexually active" is when they are taught to by the sexual pervets like planned parenthood. You only have to give children information when they ask. All they need is honest answeres, not a playboy, and planned parnthood instructions on how to be a pervert, and pedator.

reply from: Teresa18

Coco,
I never did that kind of stuff at that age. I've babysat kids at that age, my cousins are 5, 8, and 10. I watch them and talk to them enough, and they don't mention those things. This also seems to tell kids it's ok to play with their privates and masturbate. Why not tell kids just to leave their privates alone? Telling 8 year olds or 3rd graders about menustration is too young as well. If they are showing signs of puberty and asking, it's up to the parents, not the schools. The kids can always ask the school nurse if they have questions sooner, and the school nurse can contact the parents to see if it is ok to discuss things with the kid. The schools need to wait until middle school to discuss these things.
People complain about teen pregnancy rates and STDS. Kids/teens are talked about as animals that can't control themselves. Kids/teens aren't animals. They are people. People can control themselves in the extent that they don't have to have sex. Kids are sexualized younger and younger in school. It's time to let kids be kids. Just because some parents may expose their kids to too much or allow them to see older tv shows or things on the internet, doesn't mean all kids have to learn about sex. Let's leave the teaching of sex ed to middle school and high schoolers with a main emphasis on abstinence, and let's leave kids to be kids.

reply from: 4given

So what kind of age appropriate sexual education should be taught to a 5 year old? My children already know the appropriate terms in regard to genitalia- How can teaching a 5 y/o more than that be beneficial to them? And how can we trust the public school system to understand the boundries of appropriateness? And why should we as parents pass it off to the educatators to assume the responsibility? (For then parents that lack to educate their own children)

reply from: coco

Children are NOT going to tell you EVERYTHING no matter how close of a relationship you have with them( that is what I hope for but realisticly it aint gonna happen) I am not saying that EVERY child does masturbate but if they do it is normal. I agree that kids should be kids, but you know their are going to be those teens that are going to have sex and FACE IT children at 11 years old are getting pregnant. I would LOVE to live in the FANTISY world that those people believe thier children are going to wait until marriage so they shouldnt have sex education etc. COME ON PEOPLE WAKE UP!!! Your kid is going to do what ever the HELL they want, BUT what you can do is EDUCATE them well about the consequinces and pray that they are smart enough to listen!!

reply from: faithman

You talk about kids, then jump right over into teens. We are not talking about teens. Young children should not be sexualized by the death skanks of planned parenthood, and if you are to stupid to realize that, you ain't much of a parent.

reply from: coco

FYI fman children do turn into teenagers you MUST start the unfolding of the "birds and bees" FAR beyond your teenage years! And you know what as afar as the "bad parenting" comment I am going to let that one slide because I and others (im sure) reliaze that you are an angry person and are lashing out, but you are not going to get me into your company so just talk all the sh@@ you want because you are not going to bring me down to your level! Have a good one

reply from: coco

You talk about kids, then jump right over into teens. We are not talking about teens. Young children should not be sexualized by the death skanks of planned parenthood, and if you are to stupid to realize that, you ain't much of a parent.
AND AS I CAN REMEBER 11 YEAROLDS ARE NOT TEENS, I was addressing teresa for your INFO

reply from: faithman

May haps if you came down to my level, you would see what we are saying, and not continue to spit out the social progressive secular humanist drivel you have been brain washed to puke out at every turn. I point blank said that children should be given honest answeres when they ask them. When they turn into teens then answere the questions teens ask. But the stratagy of planned parenthood to sexualize the very young, is to ensure future cliants at the abortion clinic. If you are to stupid to realize that, and you turn your children over to the social progressive sexual brain washing, then you are a very bad parent, and turning the next generation over to those who hate America, and all things that are good.

reply from: nykaren

Do you actually belive this, faithman?? That Planned Parenthood wants to teach young children about sex so they will become teens and get pregnant and have abortions? If you're saying that's a fact, I'd like to see some proof of it.

reply from: faithman

Real simple skank. Go to teenwire.com. It has been brought to lite that the condoms they pass out are of the pourest quality, and have the highest failure rate. The "pill" they dish out is the lowest dosage allowed, and still be called "birth control". I know how lazy and closed minded you death skanks are, but if you do your own home work, you will see that what I am saying is true. It is also a fact that when planned parenthood gets involved in "sex ed" teen pregnancy, and STD's go thru the roof. Get a book called GRAND ILLUSIONS . They have all the facts and figures. Also Life Dynamics has alot of information on these issues. But I don't think it will make a difference with a depraved skank such as yourself. You are willingly ignorant, and care less about fact, and love the darkness of planned parenthood.

reply from: MayaSharona

A friend of mine is of the same mind as a lot of Christian conservatives on this thread, i.e., even minimal sex ed is not for the ears and eyes of children under 10.
Well her daughter Darcy came in from playing one day, screaming at the top of her lungs. Her mother took one look at her, and at the blood smearing the inside of her shorts and thigh, and called the police, thinking she had been raped.
After calling the police, an investigation, and a trip to the hospital, the verdict was: the child had begun to menstruate. At age SEVEN. There's even a term for it: precocious puberty. Or achieving puberty at an extremely early age. Apparently, it's happening more and more these days, and it is attributed to the overuse of hormones in our food supply (such as beef).
Darcy was big for her age. At age 7, she looked like a ten year old and even had small breasts. Her mother, I suppose, either did not notice or refused to notice.
The price for this was complete terror on the part of her daughter. Even after her mother was finally forced to explain her own body to her, Darcy still awoke with nightmares about "bleeding to death down there" for months afterward, and looked upon her monthly menstruation with fear and trepidation that lasted all the way into her teen years.
So much for thinking kids shouldn't have minimal sex ed before the age of 10.

reply from: faithman

Your little hard case fairy tail does not justify the sexualzation of young children. Pro-death skanks will use any rare, and hard case, and out and out lie, to smear their perversion over our culture. This is futhure evidence of how low these degenerates will stoop to steal the innocents of the young for political reasons.

reply from: MayaSharona

Excuse me, "Faith"man.
It was no fairy tale. It happens quite often. Perhaps picking up some health books might enlighten you.
You use the word "skank" quite often in this forum, and I notice nobody calls you on it. Even though there is supposed to be some form of "etiquette" on this board that is apparently enforced for only a portion of the viewing/posting public. Interesting.
My friend is a Christian conservative. That should tell you her views on abortion. You, "Faith"man, may have faith, but in WHAT I have no idea. It certainly isn't Christianity. Not by ritually abusing people as you do.

reply from: 4given

So what are your views on abortion? What do you think is an adequate age to start educating the youth on sex? Is 5 years appropriate? What kind of education should a kindergartener have in regards to sex?

reply from: MayaSharona

Against it.
Children begin asking questions as young as 3. Mine did. It could only assist in assuaging the fears and curiosity kids have regarding some matters of sex. For example, it is not inappropriate to explain where babies come from, and how they are a result of the union of the father and the mother in an act of love. As for male and female bodily functions, it is MHO to keep an eye on your kid. If they seem to be developing faster than usual, then you better have that talk with them sooner than later. My friend ignored her daughter's development, even after I urged her to deal with it many times before. How much grief could've been saved that kid had my friend only swallowed her "taboo" and spoke to her daughter about her own body.
See above.
See above.

reply from: MayaSharona

Thanks CP.
I am a newbie to posting here, but not to reading. I've read here for quite some time. So yeah, I kind of came to the same conclusion you did regarding "Faith"man.
It's unfortunate that some people have to be so nasty, so rude, in their posts. I take high offense at the word "skank" used so cavalierly by him in nearly all of his posts, as it is a very nasty word for a female. I am quite sure he wouldn't like to see people referring to him as "BibleScum" or something similar.
It's a shame that some heads remain so locked tight that a prybar would be unable to let in some common sense and courtesy.

reply from: faithman

At least my mind is not SSSSSOOOOO open my brains have fallen out. It is stupid to expose young children to material that is way to mature for their age group. Sexual assault is up because of the wide spread use of "sex ed" not the lack of it. Your skanky post offends me. So I guess feelings are mutual. It is called American, and it is called the first amendment. You have the right to puke out your low like skanky drivel, and I have the right to call you on it.

reply from: coco

YES I TOTALLY BELIEVE YOU!! And welcome to the form, stories like this proves that the "carrie" syndrome is alive and well. Yes my kids started asking questions also and I answer with NO embaressment! Sex & maturation is normal and unfortunetly people want to keep it taboo too children and when something like this happens the children can be emotionally a wreck for a period of time, But hopfully the girl has FULL recoverd.

reply from: nykaren

Well, my question was specifically about the teaching of the very young, not of teens. By very young, I meant kindergarteners, which is what this thread was supposedly about. I already know what PP teaches teens. Can you tell me specifically what it is they teach in kindergarten that offends you so badly and aims these small children directly for the abortion mills? Or was your comment just more of your raging paranoia?

reply from: 4given

That could be interpreted as being nasty and rude.

reply from: nykaren

That could be interpreted as being nasty and rude.
I assume you are trying to be funny, right? Compared to faithman's diatribes, she's not even coming close to nasty.

reply from: 4given

No- I was not trying to humor anyone. That was rude.. not nearly as "nasty" as he has been- you are right there. The term Bible-Scum.. (I am guessing she was trying to be clever w/ "faithman") is what is nasty. It is odd to me that pro-lifers divide themselves.. I guess w/ all people- that's true. I know "skank" is hard to get used to- Now that I've read it this much, it doesn't effect me like it did initially- But referring to anyone as Bible-scum should be offensive to you as well- if you are a Christian.

reply from: nykaren

I'm not sure why we should be expected to get used to faithman's vulgarity, or why it is allowed here in the first place. And yes, I would be offended if the term Bible-scum was aimed at me. Anyone who uses God's Word the way that man does, and posts his childish hatred for those of us who don't agree with his every idea, should not expect any respect from anyone, IMHO.

reply from: 4given

I'm not sure why we should be expected to get used to faithman's vulgarity, or why it is allowed here in the first place. And yes, I would be offended if the term Bible-scum was aimed at me. Anyone who uses God's Word the way that man does, and posts his childish hatred for those of us who don't agree with his every idea, should not expect any respect from anyone, IMHO.
It isn't aimed at those that "don't agree with his every idea" but mostly towards those that don't agree w/ the idea that matters- the choice and right to mutilate womb children. Many don't respect him, and it is apparent to me that respect isn't what he's after- I can't say he has any motive but to educate- and w/ the I AM A PERSON cards- he is doing just that- He provides them to those w/ an interest in educating others- beyond that- it is a matter of personal opinion- he loves the unborn and fights for them. I respect that.

reply from: Teresa18

Ususally the doctor is able to tell based on how far developed a kid is. If a child is developing breasts and pubic hair, then yes, I think a parent absolutely needs to talk to their child. However, most kids don't start so young. It's not fair to sexualize all children for the sake of a few.
An internet poll was taken on this topic. Well over 90% said they would not want their child exposed to sex ed in kindergarten.
Children are NOT going to tell you EVERYTHING no matter how close of a relationship you have with them( that is what I hope for but realisticly it aint gonna happen) I am not saying that EVERY child does masturbate but if they do it is normal.
Ok. Some kids do know more than others. The whole population of kids does not need to be sexualized or exposed to sex because of a few. The majority of kids are not getting pregnant at 11. You liberals need to wake up. Kids are being taught more and more about sex in schools. It's happening younger and younger in order to bend to a highly sexualized culture. It's time to start going in the other direction. Expose them to this in middle school. Strongly emphasize abstinence with just basic health facts regarding birth control. Don't be afraid to teach some semblance of morals. Allow parents to opt their kids out if they wish.

reply from: faithman

Ususally the doctor is able to tell based on how far developed a kid is. If a child is developing breasts and pubic hair, then yes, I think a parent absolutely needs to talk to their child. However, most kids don't start so young. It's not fair to sexualize all children for the sake of a few.
An internet poll was taken on this topic. Well over 90% said they would not want their child exposed to sex ed in kindergarten.
Children are NOT going to tell you EVERYTHING no matter how close of a relationship you have with them( that is what I hope for but realisticly it aint gonna happen) I am not saying that EVERY child does masturbate but if they do it is normal.
Ok. Some kids do know more than others. The whole population of kids does not need to be sexualized or exposed to sex because of a few. The majority of kids are not getting pregnant at 11. You liberals need to wake up. Kids are being taught more and more about sex in schools. It's happening younger and younger in order to bend to a highly sexualized culture. It's time to start going in the other direction. Expose them to this in middle school. Strongly emphasize abstinence with just basic health facts regarding birth control. Don't be afraid to teach some semblance of morals. Allow parents to opt their kids out if they wish.
Have you noticed how the death pukes flip flop between the age groups, then try to confuse what actually was said? It is wrong to place the very young in the same catagory as teens.

reply from: coco

go ahead stick your head in the sand it seems to work!! We are talking about sex ed not starting at a specific time, its a gradual process. YOU ARE NOT GOING TO TELL YOUR 16 YEAR OLD SON "son that thing that is hanging from your body is called a penis" because DUH at 16 he SHOULD know that by then and you are NOT going to tell little suzy the 3 yearold "HONEY you stick the penis into the vagina and ejaculation comes out" , and expect her to understand!!! know you have to GRANDUALLY let them know but EVEN if they ask a question it MUST be answered in a HONEST reply. And this is how it all went down
In response to criticism from Republican Mitt Romney, Obama said the former Massachusetts governor was only trying to "score cheap political points" when he told a Colorado audience that Obama wanted sex education for kindergartners.
"All I said was that I support the same laws that exist in Massachusetts and New Hampshire, in which local communities and parents can make decisions to provide children with the information they need to deal with sexual predators," Obama said.
Romney on Wednesday targeted Obama for supporting a bill during his term in the Illinois state Senate that would have, among other things, provided age-appropriate sex education for all students.
"How much sex education is age appropriate for a 5-year-old? In my mind, zero is the right number," Romney said.
Obama said Romney was wrong to take the shot and incorrect on its basis.
"We have to deal with a coarsening of the culture and the over-sexualization of our young people. Look, I've got two daughters, 9 and 6 years old," Obama told the AP. "Of course, part of the coarsening of that culture is when politicians try to demagogue issues to score cheap political points."
"What we shouldn't do is to try to play a political football with these issues and express them in ways that are honest and truthful," Obama said. "Certainly, what we shouldn't do is engage in hypocrisy."
Romney himself once indicated support for similar programs that Obama supports.
In 2002, Romney told Planned Parenthood in a questionnaire that he also supported age-appropriate sex education. He checked yes to a question that asked: "Do you support the teaching of responsible, age-appropriate, factually accurate health and sexuality education, including information about both abstinence and contraception, in public schools?"
So dont get your PANTIES in a bunch ladies and gents he wants to support it for DEFEATING sexual preditors and not to PERVERSE your children

reply from: nykaren

Very interesting comment, fman. You made a comment about what pp teaches young kids. I asked you to verify what you said. You post an answer about what pp teaches teens. I ask you again the question about young kids. You don't answer at all. flip, flop, flip, flop.

reply from: MayaSharona

Your statements would be comical if they were not so sad.
By your own indication, you have gotten "used" to "Faith"man using the term SKANK...thus, you support his abuse of all women on this board by his oft-repeated use of that word, even to pro-life women such as myself.
Yet you express offense at my proposition...I haven't even officially used the term yet...to use the term "BibleScum" directed solely at him, because you say it is an offense to all Christians.
Yes, it might be an offense to all Christians.
But so is SKANK an offense to ALL women on this board. But all people with one shred of courtesy left in them should be outraged that "Faith"man is allowed to repeatedly get away with his abuse. Do you even know what that word refers to? It refers to a filthy female, usually drug-addicted and VD-riddled, who has sex with everything that crosses her path. That's what it refers to. I strongly object to being referred to as such by this disturbed little boy who thinks himself a "Christian" when he wouldn't make a good pimple on a real Christian's posterior.
So thus I must conclude that "Faith"man's abuse of people using that word in nearly every single one of his posts is OK with you, then. Unfortunate.
Does this board have no moderation? No rules to follow? Or are the rules for a select group of people only and all others can ignore them?
I am a pro-life woman. I have stated so. Yet I am still referred to as SKANK by an abusing boy with no life and lots of psychological hangups, and nobody says anything.
Well, I would like to be a part of this board to express my pro-life views and opinions like the rest of you. But I'm really tired of reading "Faith"man's filth. He will now get it back in spades.
I apologize in advance to all other Christians on this board.

reply from: faithman

All women are not skanks. Skank means a woman of low moral charator. Anyone who advocates the slaughter of the womb child to be set free from the responsibilty of sexual activity is a skank. Anyone who would turn children over to sexual perverts under the pretence of "sex ed" is a skank. All women would not be offended at the term, because all women have not be number with those of low moral charactor. The road to abortion starts with sex ed. And by the way, no one has stopped you from posting your skanky messages. And if you don't like what I got to say, put me on ignore. I have never advocated the cencorship of anyone on this forum, but death skanks have advocated for me to be cencored. Just go to any pro-death forum if you want to see filth. Just go there as a pro-lifer, and see how they treat you. And just what is so filthy about anything I have posted? Enlighten us. What proof do you have to back up that accusation?

reply from: coco

I think they did, and that's why they are "liberal." It's time to fix some of the problems caused by religious repression and guilt pertaining to sex. Historically, many of the most ill adapted to function in society have come from ultra religios backgrounds. Repressing natural sexuality and giving the impression that sex is "dirty" and "wrong" is simply unhealthy.
Ed gein comes to mind!!

reply from: MayaSharona

Is that a fact, Mr. BibleScum? Well you can put ME on ignore too if you don't like your new name.
I have to tell you, a SKANK is EXACTLY what I said it was. NOT so benignly like you said: a "woman of low moral character". I've BEEN to many forums, pro-death, pro-life. You have NO RIGHT to refer to ME, a devout pro-lifer, as a SKANK. Now or EVER. Save it for the aborting hookers hanging out on street corners.
LOL! The "proof" you ask for is right in the post above! You AGAIN refer to me as a SKANK in your above post, referring to my "Skanky Messages". And THAT is why it is FILTHY when you direct your posts at someone like ME who is PRO-LIFE like YOU, Mr. BibleScum.
I contribute money to pro-life causes. Lots of it. I try to dissuade women from killing their babies at clinics. Often, I am successful. I do it not by screaming obscenities at them like you in your love of abusive tactics would do, but by reasoned and compassionate talking. I like your pro-life stance. I hate your ABUSE of ALL WOMEN. It's as if you believe all females are SKANKS, both pro-death and pro-life alike. Why do you have that much of a hatred for women? Perhaps it is something that therapy would help greatly.
I am pro-life. Just like you. And that is where our similarities END. Thankfully.

reply from: nykaren

Your statements would be comical if they were not so sad.
By your own indication, you have gotten "used" to "Faith"man using the term SKANK...thus, you support his abuse of all women on this board by his oft-repeated use of that word, even to pro-life women such as myself.
Yet you express offense at my proposition...I haven't even officially used the term yet...to use the term "BibleScum" directed solely at him, because you say it is an offense to all Christians.
Yes, it might be an offense to all Christians.
But so is SKANK an offense to ALL women on this board. But all people with one shred of courtesy left in them should be outraged that "Faith"man is allowed to repeatedly get away with his abuse. Do you even know what that word refers to? It refers to a filthy female, usually drug-addicted and VD-riddled, who has sex with everything that crosses her path. That's what it refers to. I strongly object to being referred to as such by this disturbed little boy who thinks himself a "Christian" when he wouldn't make a good pimple on a real Christian's posterior.
So thus I must conclude that "Faith"man's abuse of people using that word in nearly every single one of his posts is OK with you, then. Unfortunate.
Does this board have no moderation? No rules to follow? Or are the rules for a select group of people only and all others can ignore them?
I am a pro-life woman. I have stated so. Yet I am still referred to as SKANK by an abusing boy with no life and lots of psychological hangups, and nobody says anything.
Well, I would like to be a part of this board to express my pro-life views and opinions like the rest of you. But I'm really tired of reading "Faith"man's filth. He will now get it back in spades.
I apologize in advance to all other Christians on this board.
Very well said. And I certainly don't see any need to apologize to the Christians on this board. With very few exceptions, they support his behavior, simply by allowing him to get away with it. I've been told before that his relationship with God is between himself and God. As far as I'm concerned it is not. He is the one who chooses to use God's Word and his supposed Christian faith to further his agenda. It gives him a "crutch" to hide behind here. And he is allowed to do so, very effectively, because he "helps the babies". And we should just get used to being called filthy names. It's ridiculous.

reply from: nykaren

Very interesting comment, fman. You made a comment about what pp teaches young kids. I asked you to verify what you said. You post an answer about what pp teaches teens. I ask you again the question about young kids. You don't answer at all. flip, flop, flip, flop.
So you have no "facts" to answer my question?

reply from: faithman

No, because all you are going to do is twist what I have said, and take it out of context. I gave you a reference to a book that has all the info you need. Grand Illusions. Now go do your own home work death skank.

reply from: coco

Fman why do you have to be SO disrespectful and filled with HATE and anger?? I think you need to chill there is no reason for your hate. I understand from what you metioned that you and your family are undergoing a tough time and this is when you need the message of LOVE the most. I understand your wife has cancer and you are going through the griving process but that gives you NO right whatsoever to be so mean ( for lack of a better word) You say you are a christian but your actions are oppisite you CONSTANTLY put others down and show NO compassion whats so ever and put your self on a moral hierarchy. That is not how you get people to listen to your message. I now what you are going to say blahblah I am better then you because I read the bible BLAH BLAH your secular message perverts kids BLAH BLAH well let me tell you something YOUR message is also perverting kids you using the words of skank and butt pirates or what ever you say I cant imagene what words your children have been exposed too

reply from: xnavy

btw how is your wife faithman???

reply from: nykaren

Yeah, like I'm going to spend $20 on a book YOU highly recommend. And all because you can't back up your accusations made here against PP.

reply from: faithman

Yeah, like I'm going to spend $20 on a book YOU highly recommend. And all because you can't back up your accusations made here against PP.
Another fine example of you simply not accepting the information given. You ask for proof, I gave you a refernce that backs up what I have said, then you reject it, then falsly accuse me of not supplying you with info. Just like a lieing pro-death skank.

reply from: faithman

I respect no death skank, nor do they deserve it. You are the one abusing your children by turning them over to perverts. That deserves no repect as well. When you start acting respectable, you will get it. Teaching your children to be horn dogs and sluts is not what I call worthy of respect, which is my right.

reply from: FaithWithoutWorksIsDead

Yeah, like I'm going to spend $20 on a book YOU highly recommend. And all because you can't back up your accusations made here against PP.
What I love most about this forum is how pathetically bad these debaters all are.
In a live debate between a pro-abort and a pro-choice VERY few people would be able to survive.
I'd get my butt laughed out of the building if I tried FMANS approach, but others here are soo soft and all about mercy they would get their words twisted and molded into sounding foolish and the pro-abort would easily win.
There needs to be WAY better balance.
Karen, as always your post presents reason to doubt you were ever 'pro-life' seeing as how you debate in the typical pro-abort manner.
Maybe I'm wrong about the you ever being pro-life aspect, but im certainly correct about your debate tactics being identicle to a pro-abort.
Fman responds to your post by mentioning a book with all the answers to your questions, instead of asking others about the book, or even going on a limb, you just say you don't like Fman therefor the book MUST be wrong.
Kinda stupid, VERY pro-abort.
Grand Illusions is a book that is tried and true, and its the same no matter WHO reads it.
And if 20$ is too rich for your blood then go to a library.
Even if your do hate Fman and are sadly misled enough to believe dislike for a person discredits a source mentioned by that person, the fact its FREE has to at least let you realize you have no reason NOT to get the book other then a personal dislike to the idea of reading it and being proven wrong and Fman being proven right.
The book is good, GET IT.
The other aspect is nobody who was EVER pro-life would support or even slightly trust Planned Parenthood.
Its not even PL-101, its PL-001 (College credit reference).
Planned Parenthood is the biggest scum of the earth and even baby-killers have a hard time trying to bother defending them.
Fman is correct in everything he has said about PP.
Its easy to not like someone, its foolish to ignore what they say simply because of a dislike.
Ignoring Fman because his attitude/spelling would be like an adult ignoring a child who says "I saw someone put a bomb there" just because the kid says "bomb" funny or has a bad attitude.

reply from: MayaSharona

I respect no death skank, nor do they deserve it. You are the one abusing your children by turning them over to perverts. That deserves no repect as well. When you start acting respectable, you will get it. Teaching your children to be horn dogs and sluts is not what I call worthy of respect, which is my right.
I fail to see how instructing your children where babies come from and their own bodily processes is "teaching them to be horn dogs and sluts".
What do/did you teach your kids (if you have any) about this? That on the day they were born they fell out of the sky, and that your daughter is menstruating because God hates her and your son gets an erection because Satan is in him?

reply from: faithman

I respect no death skank, nor do they deserve it. You are the one abusing your children by turning them over to perverts. That deserves no repect as well. When you start acting respectable, you will get it. Teaching your children to be horn dogs and sluts is not what I call worthy of respect, which is my right.
I fail to see how instructing your children where babies come from and their own bodily processes is "teaching them to be horn dogs and sluts".
What do/did you teach your kids (if you have any) about this? That on the day they were born they fell out of the sky, and that your daughter is menstruating because God hates her and your son gets an erection because Satan is in him?
....and you claim to be "pro-life" but have no problem with Planned Parenthood having access to young children? Maybe skank is to kind.

reply from: MayaSharona

I respect no death skank, nor do they deserve it. You are the one abusing your children by turning them over to perverts. That deserves no repect as well. When you start acting respectable, you will get it. Teaching your children to be horn dogs and sluts is not what I call worthy of respect, which is my right.
I fail to see how instructing your children where babies come from and their own bodily processes is "teaching them to be horn dogs and sluts".
What do/did you teach your kids (if you have any) about this? That on the day they were born they fell out of the sky, and that your daughter is menstruating because God hates her and your son gets an erection because Satan is in him?
....and you claim to be "pro-life" but have no problem with Planned Parenthood having access to young children? Maybe skank is to kind.
Hey Mr. BibleScum...
I also fail to see where in my post I even mentioned Planned Parenthood. Can you point it out for us please?
I think BibleScum is too kind. ScumAss may be more suitable for you.
I asked what do YOU teach your kids? I taught MINE the facts of life. Early. They are now well-adjusted, life-respecting teenagers. PP taught them ZERO.

reply from: faithman

I respect no death skank, nor do they deserve it. You are the one abusing your children by turning them over to perverts. That deserves no repect as well. When you start acting respectable, you will get it. Teaching your children to be horn dogs and sluts is not what I call worthy of respect, which is my right.
I fail to see how instructing your children where babies come from and their own bodily processes is "teaching them to be horn dogs and sluts".
What do/did you teach your kids (if you have any) about this? That on the day they were born they fell out of the sky, and that your daughter is menstruating because God hates her and your son gets an erection because Satan is in him?
....and you claim to be "pro-life" but have no problem with Planned Parenthood having access to young children? Maybe skank is to kind.
Hey Mr. BibleScum...
I also fail to see where in my post I even mentioned Planned Parenthood. Can you point it out for us please?
I think BibleScum is too kind. ScumAss may be more suitable for you.
I asked what do YOU teach your kids? I taught MINE the facts of life. Early. They are now well-adjusted, life-respecting teenagers. PP taught them ZERO.
Click on the site in my sig, and you will see what I have shown to tens of thousands of children of all ages.

reply from: faithman

http://www.ala.org/Template.cfm?Section=News&template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=119074.............. copy and paste in the go to box, and you will see "it's perfectly normal" which is propaganda Planned barenhood uses to sexualize preteens. They use i regularly at a sex conference for preteens in our local area.http://

reply from: yoda

Ask yourself this question: How am I helping unborn babies by engaging in a name-calling contest with another self-identified prolifer?
Is that what you came here to do? We already have a moderator on this forum, if you think someone has crossed the line, click on the "Report this to a Moderator" link and make a report. This infighting does nothing for the cause of unborn babies.... to the contrary, it helps the baby killers.

reply from: faithman

Ask yourself this question: How am I helping unborn babies by engaging in a name-calling contest with another self-identified prolifer?
Is that what you came here to do? We already have a moderator on this forum, if you think someone has crossed the line, click on the "Report this to a Moderator" link and make a report. This infighting does nothing for the cause of unborn babies.... to the contrary, it helps the baby killers.
spoil sport.

reply from: yoda

I see you are learning not to be so easily baited. Good work!

reply from: faithman

What hooks the fish, the early bird gets credit for catching.

reply from: nykaren

I didn't say the book must be wrong. I said I would certainly not take his recommendations on a book (or anything else, for that matter). You think he'd take mine? No, but that is somehow different, of course.
Thank you for the info. I will check it out. And no, I don't hate Fman. That's his department. I pity him. I do hate his vulgar language and name-calling. As a Christian you should to. But you defend it.
Where did I say I support PP? I asked a simple question. If that makes me sound like a pro-abort, sorry. I'm not. But neither am I stupid enough to not question some things posted here as fact. I've seen enough paranoia and hate here on the subject of my grandson and daughter to take accusations toward anyone at face value. And he immediately switched to talking about teens, which was not at all what I asked.

This has nothing to do with a speech impediment or attitude of a child. It has to do with hatred and vulgarity. And if he's going to dish it out, he may as well get used to taking it.

reply from: coco

Grand Illusions is a book that is tried and true, and its the same no matter WHO reads it.
And if 20$ is too rich for your blood then go to a library.
Even if your do hate Fman and are sadly misled enough to believe dislike for a person discredits a source mentioned by that person, the fact its FREE has to at least let you realize you have no reason NOT to get the book other then a personal dislike to the idea of reading it and being proven wrong and Fman being proven right.
The book is good, GET IT.
Thank you for the info. I will check it out. And no, I don't hate Fman. That's his department. I pity him. I do hate his vulgar language and name-calling. As a Christian you should to. But you defend it.
I totally agree with you ny, and I also feel sadness for him and his family, THAT is why I TRY not to call him names (although it is hard at times).

reply from: MayaSharona

Ask yourself this question: How am I helping unborn babies by engaging in a name-calling contest with another self-identified prolifer?
Is that what you came here to do? We already have a moderator on this forum, if you think someone has crossed the line, click on the "Report this to a Moderator" link and make a report. This infighting does nothing for the cause of unborn babies.... to the contrary, it helps the baby killers.
Excuse me, Yodavater...
I do not, nor have I ever, see you admonishing "Faith"man for calling PRO-LIFE WOMEN "SKANKS". On the contrary, he uses the word more than ever, and as cavalierly as ever. With your support and encouragement, so it would seem.
Why is that? Care to explain?
However, I will do what you say. I shall click on the link you identified if the word is directed at me one more time. Do not think, though, that I shall sit idly by and let this little maladjusted boy call ME a SKANK.
Understood? I would hope so.
Now...tomorrow is my day that I volunteer my time talking to young pregnant girls at a crisis pregnancy center not far from here. It is called http://www.choicesofheart.com/, and they do great work. So I must say an early "good night".
Perhaps "Faith"man should do as much instead of abusing all who cross his path. And perhaps you, Yodavater, would do well to encourage him more in that direction and less in his abusive practices.

reply from: coco

I think that is GREAT that you volenteer for women and girls in need! I am trying to get in contact with an agency not really affiliated with a religion. Do you know of anywere that I would be able to look?

reply from: faithman

Mr. vader does not take up for me, and we have had our fusses as well. So just leave him out of it. I have supplied several thousand people with free womb baby pictures all over the country includding more than a few CPC. So don't stick your condesending nose up at me. You come in here making some statements that were very skankish. You were not up front about being pro-life at all. There should be absolutely no sex ed before middle school, and most assuredly all planned parenthood material should be out of all the schools. If you make skank statements, I will call you one, so get over it. You have that snooty CPC attitude like you are SSSSSOOOOO superior to street activist, so I doubt you would want the best pro-life tract around. But I will send you a free sample if you PM me a snail mail. Also have a very good series of emails we have sent all over the world.

reply from: carolemarie

I would suggest putting Faithman on ignore. It is certainly much more pleasant on the board that way! There is no point letting him upset you.
I am so glad that you are working at a Crisis Pregnancy Center. All over America, thousands and thousands of babies are alive because of their hard work! You are a hero!
I have been going to the clinics and volunteering at a CPC for over 12 years. God works so powerfully when we work together.
Much Love,
Carole

reply from: carolemarie

Skank is highly offensive to me and other women. There is no real reason to use that term except to provoke people.
We should attempt to be polite to each other, which doesn't mean we can't disagree, but personal attacks are counter productive. If you talk to someone with the view of changing their mind, you would get farther by being polite.
If his comments bother you, put him on ignore and you won't have to listen to it anymore.
Blessings,
Carole

reply from: MayaSharona

I made no "skankish statements", dear boy. None. I made no reference whatsoever to your precious Planned Parenthood that you seem to be so obsessed over I think that you secretly support them. So once again, I have no idea what the hell you're rambling about. When you're on against abortion, you are on, and I like your stance most of the time. But when you go off on the "skankiness" of women who are about as skanky as Mother Teresa, and when you go off abusing people with a passion that exceeds your anti-abortion stance because you seem to think you're so holy and pure over everyone else here, then you know where you can bite me, right? Do so, then.
You never did answer my questions about your own kids (if you have any). No sex ed before middle school, eh? I told my own kids what they needed to know before they were 5. They are now well-adjusted pro-life teenagers who work alongside me at Choices of the Heart. Tell me then, for the second time, do/did you tell your kids that they fell out of the sky on the day they were born? Do you tell your daughter that she is menstruating because God hates her? Do you tell your son he gets erections because Satan is in him? Did you eventually tell them the sexual act is for dark closets only, and only if the girl doesn't enjoy it, and only for the purpose of procreation, rather than telling them of the beauty of the joining of two souls and bodies within the sanctity of marriage?
Why do I suspect that you do/did? How sadly unfortunate for them. If the preceding is untrue, then elaborate for us, please. I'd be most interested to hear it.
We have 1000s of excellent tracts at COTH. But there, rather than shoving bloody, decapitated fetal pictures under the noses of scared young pregnant girls and screeching SKANK! in their faces like you would do, we counsel them, talk to them, pray with them if they want, ultrasound their unborn babies and talk to them about it, make arrangements to get them help if they need it in the form of prenatal care, baby clothes, supplies, a place to live, etc. Do you know what our success rate is? 100% You heard me, 100%. Every pregnant abortion-thinking woman who has come to us or who has been brought to us by a family member, has changed her mind and had her baby instead.
What's your success rate?
Yeah. That's exactly what I thought. Your tactics serve to accomplish nothing. Except to make yourself and everyone else believe that you're some sort of half-assed Abortion Warrior or something.
When you do something that really MATTERS, you do not need to use abusive tactics to achieve your objective. Hopefully someday, you will learn this.

reply from: MayaSharona

Thank you, Carole. But I'm not a hero. God is. He's the one who changes their minds, really. And I'm not even a traditional Christian, but that is who must be given ultimate credit here.
CPCs are great places to be a part of, aren't they? We really feel that we can help make a difference in the lives of unsure pregnant women.
Coco, you asked if there was a non-religious-centered CPC that you could be a part of. I really don't know. All the ones I know of ARE religious-centered. But you don't have to be a traditionalist Christian to volunteer at one, they accept all enthusiastic pro-life volunteers, Christian or not.
The word that "Faith"man frequently uses..."skank"...means, in short, a dirty prostitute. That's what it means, look in any regular or slang dictionary. It does not mean "a woman of low moral character." It means a filthy slut. Period. If he wants to scream this word at scared pregnant girls going into clinics, he's free to. But I guarantee he will not change any minds that way. However, I refuse to allow him to assault me with that word, which he did right off the bat after my first post here, assuming (erroneously, of course) that I was a supporter of Planned Parenthood.
Apparently, he has also insulted you, Carole, with that word. He insults all women here, and no one stops him. Yet I am admonished for (sic) "coming here to engage in a name-calling contest with another self-identified prolifer". Sorry, I did not start the assault. I just defended myself.
I've decided not to put "Faith"man on Ignore. I see no reason to. If he cannot play nicely, then he shall sit in the corner with a Dunce cap on his head until he learns how.

reply from: faithman

I made no "skankish statements", dear boy. None. I made no reference whatsoever to your precious Planned Parenthood that you seem to be so obsessed over I think that you secretly support them. So once again, I have no idea what the hell you're rambling about. When you're on against abortion, you are on, and I like your stance most of the time. But when you go off on the "skankiness" of women who are about as skanky as Mother Teresa, and when you go off abusing people with a passion that exceeds your anti-abortion stance because you seem to think you're so holy and pure over everyone else here, then you know where you can bite me, right? Do so, then.
You never did answer my questions about your own kids (if you have any). No sex ed before middle school, eh? I told my own kids what they needed to know before they were 5. They are now well-adjusted pro-life teenagers who work alongside me at Choices of the Heart. Tell me then, for the second time, do/did you tell your kids that they fell out of the sky on the day they were born? Do you tell your daughter that she is menstruating because God hates her? Do you tell your son he gets erections because Satan is in him? Did you eventually tell them the sexual act is for dark closets only, and only if the girl doesn't enjoy it, and only for the purpose of procreation, rather than telling them of the beauty of the joining of two souls and bodies within the sanctity of marriage?
Why do I suspect that you do/did? How sadly unfortunate for them. If the preceding is untrue, then elaborate for us, please. I'd be most interested to hear it.
We have 1000s of excellent tracts at COTH. But there, rather than shoving bloody, decapitated fetal pictures under the noses of scared young pregnant girls and screeching SKANK! in their faces like you would do, we counsel them, talk to them, pray with them if they want, ultrasound their unborn babies and talk to them about it, make arrangements to get them help if they need it in the form of prenatal care, baby clothes, supplies, a place to live, etc. Do you know what our success rate is? 100% You heard me, 100%. Every pregnant abortion-thinking woman who has come to us or who has been brought to us by a family member, has changed her mind and had her baby instead.
What's your success rate?
Yeah. That's exactly what I thought. Your tactics serve to accomplish nothing. Except to make yourself and everyone else believe that you're some sort of half-assed Abortion Warrior or something.
When you do something that really MATTERS, you do not need to use abusive tactics to achieve your objective. Hopefully someday, you will learn this.
Hey prissy missy, you make my point.I have said NO SEX ED IN THE SCHOOLS, and that PARENTS SHOULD TEACH THEIR OWN CHILDREN WITH HONEST ANSWERES WHEN ASKED!!. Now twist my words and make me say what I haven't again. Skank also means low moral charator , which a slut, and most pro-death skanks have. And if you really took the time to check out what I have said, I use the live baby pictures, which I have found much more effective than the bloody. And have already had that fuss with the bloody picture boyz on this forum. I also have said, and you would know if you took the time to read my post, that I have supplied the same materials to several CPC's activist groups, and individuals, all over this country and several around the world. Then you tell the lie that I call all women skanks. You need to apologize for that lie. I do not call all women skanks. Women who have come to you are looking for different answeres. We will never end this by merely sitting back and waiting for some to come and then brag about %100 rate when %100 are looking to go that way. There are twice as many CPC's as abortion clinics, and yet it is still legal. That PROVES THAT CPC's ARE ONLY A SMALL PART OF THE ANSWERE!! And yet they soak up a huge hunk of pro-life change and give little in return. The I AM A PERSON cards would make CPC's obsolete, as when you educate folk to the beautiful images of the womb child, folk decide not to get them killed. Prevention thru educatiion is the answere. That means we have to get out of our ivory towers CPC's, and quit waiting for folk to come to us, and go to them with the image of the face of the womb child. I don't keep count, because I am not trying to impress anybody to get into their pocket book. I am freely giving the best pro-life tract out to anyone who asks. I am mailing out posters free to the front liners when I get the funds. I don't just gripe about the bloody boyz, I send them material to make a positive change, and it is working as they have greatfully accepted the cards and posters and are using them with great success. Hopefully one day you will realize that you pretence of civility is the most abusive tactic of all, for it ensures abortion on demand remains leagal, while you claim %100 success rate, for those who are %100 looking to go that way, which is a very small percentage of abortion minded women. Very nice spin, but actually is a cherry picked truth, and does not come close to actually looking at the big picture. I have been doing this full time for over 15 years. I have stuffed the envolopes, licked the stamps, manned the fair booths, marched the parades, picketed the clinics, donated heavily to CPC's, drove truth trucks, and engaged the pro-aborts when ever they rear their ugly skanky heads. And if you think you or any body else are going to put me in the corner, try it. It aint been done yet. And you dont have all that, to get it done either. You come onto this forum to bait a fight, and you got one. For is is "pro-lifers" like you that have kept abortion legal for over 30 years. You keep trying to tie your pink bow on the top of the mountain of dead babies. This is a fight, not a CPC banquit, or a little life walk in the park. 4000 womb children will die today, and all CPC's tell us is that they have %100 success, when %100 percent of women they see are looking that way, and a huge percent of the women they see were sent there by the activist they condemn standing on the line at the abortion mill. Take your little smug behind back to your clean little CPC and shut up about things you have no idea what you are talking about. And I did answere your question about what I show children. But you just refuse to accept my answere. Just click the web site in this post and you will see what I have shown to 10's of thousands of
children.

reply from: nykaren

Maya and Carole, I've always believed CPCs were a much more effective way to fight abortion than the protesting and violence and hatred promoted by many prolifers. My activism over the years has been in encouraging teens to save sex for marriage through a local group that gets that message to teens and pre-teens. We use tracts, promise cards, and a phone hotline mostly, also classes on what marriage should be. My kids have both been involved as well. I really admire both of you for the work you do and that you've done it for so many years!

reply from: faithman

....and this from a woman who would have all abortion legal so they could legally kill a grand son. WHAT AN ENDORESMENT!!!!!

reply from: MayaSharona

I made no "skankish statements", dear boy. None. I made no reference whatsoever to your precious Planned Parenthood that you seem to be so obsessed over I think that you secretly support them. So once again, I have no idea what the hell you're rambling about. When you're on against abortion, you are on, and I like your stance most of the time. But when you go off on the "skankiness" of women who are about as skanky as Mother Teresa, and when you go off abusing people with a passion that exceeds your anti-abortion stance because you seem to think you're so holy and pure over everyone else here, then you know where you can bite me, right? Do so, then.
You never did answer my questions about your own kids (if you have any). No sex ed before middle school, eh? I told my own kids what they needed to know before they were 5. They are now well-adjusted pro-life teenagers who work alongside me at Choices of the Heart. Tell me then, for the second time, do/did you tell your kids that they fell out of the sky on the day they were born? Do you tell your daughter that she is menstruating because God hates her? Do you tell your son he gets erections because Satan is in him? Did you eventually tell them the sexual act is for dark closets only, and only if the girl doesn't enjoy it, and only for the purpose of procreation, rather than telling them of the beauty of the joining of two souls and bodies within the sanctity of marriage?
Why do I suspect that you do/did? How sadly unfortunate for them. If the preceding is untrue, then elaborate for us, please. I'd be most interested to hear it.
We have 1000s of excellent tracts at COTH. But there, rather than shoving bloody, decapitated fetal pictures under the noses of scared young pregnant girls and screeching SKANK! in their faces like you would do, we counsel them, talk to them, pray with them if they want, ultrasound their unborn babies and talk to them about it, make arrangements to get them help if they need it in the form of prenatal care, baby clothes, supplies, a place to live, etc. Do you know what our success rate is? 100% You heard me, 100%. Every pregnant abortion-thinking woman who has come to us or who has been brought to us by a family member, has changed her mind and had her baby instead.
What's your success rate?
Yeah. That's exactly what I thought. Your tactics serve to accomplish nothing. Except to make yourself and everyone else believe that you're some sort of half-assed Abortion Warrior or something.
When you do something that really MATTERS, you do not need to use abusive tactics to achieve your objective. Hopefully someday, you will learn this.
Hey prissy missy, you make my point.I have said NO SEX ED IN THE SCHOOLS, and that PARENTS SHOULD TEACH THEIR OWN CHILDREN WITH HONEST ANSWERES WHEN ASKED!!. Now twist my words and make me say what I haven't again. Skank also means low moral charator , which a slut, and most pro-death skanks have. And if you really took the time to check out what I have said, I use the live baby pictures, which I have found much more effective than the bloody. And have already had that fuss with the bloody picture boyz on this forum. I also have said, and you would know if you took the time to read my post, that I have supplied the same materials to several CPC's activist groups, and individuals, all over this country and several around the world. Then you tell the lie that I call all women skanks. You need to apologize for that lie. I do not call all women skanks. Women who have come to you are looking for different answeres. We will never end this by merely sitting back and waiting for some to come and then brag about %100 rate when %100 are looking to go that way. There are twice as many CPC's as abortion clinics, and yet it is still legal. That PROVES THAT CPC's ARE ONLY A SMALL PART OF THE ANSWERE!! And yet they soak up a huge hunk of pro-life change and give little in return. The I AM A PERSON cards would make CPC's obsolete, as when you educate folk to the beautiful images of the womb child, folk decide not to get them killed. Prevention thru educatiion is the answere. That means we have to get out of our ivory towers CPC's, and quit waiting for folk to come to us, and go to them with the image of the face of the womb child. I don't keep count, because I am not trying to impress anybody to get into their pocket book. I am freely giving the best pro-life tract out to anyone who asks. I am mailing out posters free to the front liners when I get the funds. I don't just gripe about the bloody boyz, I send them material to make a positive change, and it is working as they have greatfully accepted the cards and posters and are using them with great success. Hopefully one day you will realize that you pretence of civility is the most abusive tactic of all, for it ensures abortion on demand remains leagal, while you claim %100 success rate, for those who are %100 looking to go that way, which is a very small percentage of abortion minded women. Very nice spin, but actually is a cherry picked truth, and does not come close to actually looking at the big picture. I have been doing this full time for over 15 years. I have stuffed the envolopes, licked the stamps, manned the fair booths, marched the parades, picketed the clinics, donated heavily to CPC's, drove truth trucks, and engaged the pro-aborts when ever they rear their ugly skanky heads. And if you think you or any body else are going to put me in the corner, try it. It aint been done yet. And you dont have all that, to get it done either. You come onto this forum to bait a fight, and you got one. For is is "pro-lifers" like you that have kept abortion legal for over 30 years. You keep trying to tie your pink bow on the top of the mountain of dead babies. This is a fight, not a CPC banquit, or a little life walk in the park. 4000 womb children will die today, and all CPC's tell us is that they have %100 success, when %100 percent of women they see are looking that way, and a huge percent of the women they see were sent there by the activist they condemn standing on the line at the abortion mill. Take your little smug behind back to your clean little CPC and shut up about things you have no idea what you are talking about. And I did answere your question about what I show children. But you just refuse to accept my answere. Just click the web site in this post and you will see what I have shown to 10's of thousands of
children.
I'll bare it so you can bite it, k?

reply from: nykaren

....and this from a woman who would have all abortion legal so they could legally kill a grand son. WHAT AN ENDORESMENT!!!!!
Why don't you either crawl back under your rock or show us all where I EVER said I believe all abortions should be legal. I have said there needs to be exceptions for health of the mother or 0% survival chance of the baby, which this state does not have, and I have very clearly stated my views on all other abortions. Now either show us that proof, in context of an entire message, or shut up!

reply from: faithman

I made no "skankish statements", dear boy. None. I made no reference whatsoever to your precious Planned Parenthood that you seem to be so obsessed over I think that you secretly support them. So once again, I have no idea what the hell you're rambling about. When you're on against abortion, you are on, and I like your stance most of the time. But when you go off on the "skankiness" of women who are about as skanky as Mother Teresa, and when you go off abusing people with a passion that exceeds your anti-abortion stance because you seem to think you're so holy and pure over everyone else here, then you know where you can bite me, right? Do so, then.
You never did answer my questions about your own kids (if you have any). No sex ed before middle school, eh? I told my own kids what they needed to know before they were 5. They are now well-adjusted pro-life teenagers who work alongside me at Choices of the Heart. Tell me then, for the second time, do/did you tell your kids that they fell out of the sky on the day they were born? Do you tell your daughter that she is menstruating because God hates her? Do you tell your son he gets erections because Satan is in him? Did you eventually tell them the sexual act is for dark closets only, and only if the girl doesn't enjoy it, and only for the purpose of procreation, rather than telling them of the beauty of the joining of two souls and bodies within the sanctity of marriage?
Why do I suspect that you do/did? How sadly unfortunate for them. If the preceding is untrue, then elaborate for us, please. I'd be most interested to hear it.
We have 1000s of excellent tracts at COTH. But there, rather than shoving bloody, decapitated fetal pictures under the noses of scared young pregnant girls and screeching SKANK! in their faces like you would do, we counsel them, talk to them, pray with them if they want, ultrasound their unborn babies and talk to them about it, make arrangements to get them help if they need it in the form of prenatal care, baby clothes, supplies, a place to live, etc. Do you know what our success rate is? 100% You heard me, 100%. Every pregnant abortion-thinking woman who has come to us or who has been brought to us by a family member, has changed her mind and had her baby instead.
What's your success rate?
Yeah. That's exactly what I thought. Your tactics serve to accomplish nothing. Except to make yourself and everyone else believe that you're some sort of half-assed Abortion Warrior or something.
When you do something that really MATTERS, you do not need to use abusive tactics to achieve your objective. Hopefully someday, you will learn this.
Hey prissy missy, you make my point.I have said NO SEX ED IN THE SCHOOLS, and that PARENTS SHOULD TEACH THEIR OWN CHILDREN WITH HONEST ANSWERES WHEN ASKED!!. Now twist my words and make me say what I haven't again. Skank also means low moral charator , which a slut, and most pro-death skanks have. And if you really took the time to check out what I have said, I use the live baby pictures, which I have found much more effective than the bloody. And have already had that fuss with the bloody picture boyz on this forum. I also have said, and you would know if you took the time to read my post, that I have supplied the same materials to several CPC's activist groups, and individuals, all over this country and several around the world. Then you tell the lie that I call all women skanks. You need to apologize for that lie. I do not call all women skanks. Women who have come to you are looking for different answeres. We will never end this by merely sitting back and waiting for some to come and then brag about %100 rate when %100 are looking to go that way. There are twice as many CPC's as abortion clinics, and yet it is still legal. That PROVES THAT CPC's ARE ONLY A SMALL PART OF THE ANSWERE!! And yet they soak up a huge hunk of pro-life change and give little in return. The I AM A PERSON cards would make CPC's obsolete, as when you educate folk to the beautiful images of the womb child, folk decide not to get them killed. Prevention thru educatiion is the answere. That means we have to get out of our ivory towers CPC's, and quit waiting for folk to come to us, and go to them with the image of the face of the womb child. I don't keep count, because I am not trying to impress anybody to get into their pocket book. I am freely giving the best pro-life tract out to anyone who asks. I am mailing out posters free to the front liners when I get the funds. I don't just gripe about the bloody boyz, I send them material to make a positive change, and it is working as they have greatfully accepted the cards and posters and are using them with great success. Hopefully one day you will realize that you pretence of civility is the most abusive tactic of all, for it ensures abortion on demand remains leagal, while you claim %100 success rate, for those who are %100 looking to go that way, which is a very small percentage of abortion minded women. Very nice spin, but actually is a cherry picked truth, and does not come close to actually looking at the big picture. I have been doing this full time for over 15 years. I have stuffed the envolopes, licked the stamps, manned the fair booths, marched the parades, picketed the clinics, donated heavily to CPC's, drove truth trucks, and engaged the pro-aborts when ever they rear their ugly skanky heads. And if you think you or any body else are going to put me in the corner, try it. It aint been done yet. And you dont have all that, to get it done either. You come onto this forum to bait a fight, and you got one. For is is "pro-lifers" like you that have kept abortion legal for over 30 years. You keep trying to tie your pink bow on the top of the mountain of dead babies. This is a fight, not a CPC banquit, or a little life walk in the park. 4000 womb children will die today, and all CPC's tell us is that they have %100 success, when %100 percent of women they see are looking that way, and a huge percent of the women they see were sent there by the activist they condemn standing on the line at the abortion mill. Take your little smug behind back to your clean little CPC and shut up about things you have no idea what you are talking about. And I did answere your question about what I show children. But you just refuse to accept my answere. Just click the web site in this post and you will see what I have shown to 10's of thousands of
children.
I'll bare it so you can bite it, k?
Why would I want to sick that repulsive stuff in my mouth. never get rid of the after taste. You are SSSSSSOOOOO impressed with it. bite it yourself.

reply from: MayaSharona

I made no "skankish statements", dear boy. None. I made no reference whatsoever to your precious Planned Parenthood that you seem to be so obsessed over I think that you secretly support them. So once again, I have no idea what the hell you're rambling about. When you're on against abortion, you are on, and I like your stance most of the time. But when you go off on the "skankiness" of women who are about as skanky as Mother Teresa, and when you go off abusing people with a passion that exceeds your anti-abortion stance because you seem to think you're so holy and pure over everyone else here, then you know where you can bite me, right? Do so, then.
You never did answer my questions about your own kids (if you have any). No sex ed before middle school, eh? I told my own kids what they needed to know before they were 5. They are now well-adjusted pro-life teenagers who work alongside me at Choices of the Heart. Tell me then, for the second time, do/did you tell your kids that they fell out of the sky on the day they were born? Do you tell your daughter that she is menstruating because God hates her? Do you tell your son he gets erections because Satan is in him? Did you eventually tell them the sexual act is for dark closets only, and only if the girl doesn't enjoy it, and only for the purpose of procreation, rather than telling them of the beauty of the joining of two souls and bodies within the sanctity of marriage?
Why do I suspect that you do/did? How sadly unfortunate for them. If the preceding is untrue, then elaborate for us, please. I'd be most interested to hear it.
We have 1000s of excellent tracts at COTH. But there, rather than shoving bloody, decapitated fetal pictures under the noses of scared young pregnant girls and screeching SKANK! in their faces like you would do, we counsel them, talk to them, pray with them if they want, ultrasound their unborn babies and talk to them about it, make arrangements to get them help if they need it in the form of prenatal care, baby clothes, supplies, a place to live, etc. Do you know what our success rate is? 100% You heard me, 100%. Every pregnant abortion-thinking woman who has come to us or who has been brought to us by a family member, has changed her mind and had her baby instead.
What's your success rate?
Yeah. That's exactly what I thought. Your tactics serve to accomplish nothing. Except to make yourself and everyone else believe that you're some sort of half-assed Abortion Warrior or something.
When you do something that really MATTERS, you do not need to use abusive tactics to achieve your objective. Hopefully someday, you will learn this.
And I did answere your question about what I show children. But you just refuse to accept my answere. Just click the web site in this post and you will see what I have shown to 10's of thousands of children.
I had previously clicked on your lick. Some very nice fetal photos and information about abortion. So...do you tell an inquiring 4 year old about the horror of abortion without telling him/her also about WHERE the fetus came from, how it came to be, why it came to be, and why it is precious?
Or do you just tell the inquiring child that God waved his magic wand and POOF it popped magically into the belly of the mother?
Those questions you did not answer, dear boy. Care to have at it?

reply from: yoda

Let's see, you joined this forum on July 25th, and already you are an expert on what goes on here, right? I've had many, conversations with FMan about his style and content, he knows my views and I know his. Not only that, countless other posters, mostly proaborts, have protested his use of that term, and his blunt language. But you show up here two days ago, and all of a sudden it's as if no one had ever commented one way or the other, right?
The bottom line is, he has his own way of expressing himself, and as long as the owners of this forum don't object he has every right to that expression. Had you read back a few weeks or even days you would have seen some of the previous discussion that has taken place, but apparently you think this forum started two days ago, right?
Well, guess what? You have the same rights as FMan has! You can continue to carp and moan and groan and attack him as long as the moderators let you....... okay? If you'd rather do that than try to represent the interests of unborn babies, then you have every right to do so..... but I'd appreciate it if you'd lower your claim to something a little less than 100% prolife if you're going to do that, okay?

reply from: faithman

I made no "skankish statements", dear boy. None. I made no reference whatsoever to your precious Planned Parenthood that you seem to be so obsessed over I think that you secretly support them. So once again, I have no idea what the hell you're rambling about. When you're on against abortion, you are on, and I like your stance most of the time. But when you go off on the "skankiness" of women who are about as skanky as Mother Teresa, and when you go off abusing people with a passion that exceeds your anti-abortion stance because you seem to think you're so holy and pure over everyone else here, then you know where you can bite me, right? Do so, then.
You never did answer my questions about your own kids (if you have any). No sex ed before middle school, eh? I told my own kids what they needed to know before they were 5. They are now well-adjusted pro-life teenagers who work alongside me at Choices of the Heart. Tell me then, for the second time, do/did you tell your kids that they fell out of the sky on the day they were born? Do you tell your daughter that she is menstruating because God hates her? Do you tell your son he gets erections because Satan is in him? Did you eventually tell them the sexual act is for dark closets only, and only if the girl doesn't enjoy it, and only for the purpose of procreation, rather than telling them of the beauty of the joining of two souls and bodies within the sanctity of marriage?
Why do I suspect that you do/did? How sadly unfortunate for them. If the preceding is untrue, then elaborate for us, please. I'd be most interested to hear it.
We have 1000s of excellent tracts at COTH. But there, rather than shoving bloody, decapitated fetal pictures under the noses of scared young pregnant girls and screeching SKANK! in their faces like you would do, we counsel them, talk to them, pray with them if they want, ultrasound their unborn babies and talk to them about it, make arrangements to get them help if they need it in the form of prenatal care, baby clothes, supplies, a place to live, etc. Do you know what our success rate is? 100% You heard me, 100%. Every pregnant abortion-thinking woman who has come to us or who has been brought to us by a family member, has changed her mind and had her baby instead.
What's your success rate?
Yeah. That's exactly what I thought. Your tactics serve to accomplish nothing. Except to make yourself and everyone else believe that you're some sort of half-assed Abortion Warrior or something.
When you do something that really MATTERS, you do not need to use abusive tactics to achieve your objective. Hopefully someday, you will learn this.
And I did answere your question about what I show children. But you just refuse to accept my answere. Just click the web site in this post and you will see what I have shown to 10's of thousands of children.
I had previously clicked on your lick. Some very nice fetal photos and information about abortion. So...do you tell an inquiring 4 year old about the horror of abortion without telling him/her also about WHERE the fetus came from, how it came to be, why it came to be, and why it is precious?
Or do you just tell the inquiring child that God waved his magic wand and POOF it popped magically into the belly of the mother?
Those questions you did not answer, dear boy. Care to have at it?
It is not my place to tell a 4 year old anything. I leave that up to the parent. I simply give parents the photos of the womb child and let them answere the questions as the child asks. I have stood and weatch as mom after mom has come into our fair both, and share with their child the wonder of pre-born life. I watch them play with the baby models, and very seldom if ever have I heard a single 4 year old ask their mother where the baby came from. It is not my jod to sexualize toddlers. All I can do is make the best material availible to their parents. And that I have done by the thousands.

reply from: yoda

Look, if you're going to make absolute statements, know what you're talking about, okay?
skank:
2 informal, chiefly N. Amer. a sleazy or unpleasant person.
http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/skank?view=uk

3. One who is digustingly foul or filthy and often considered sexually promiscuous. Used especially of a woman or girl.
http://www.bartleby.com/61/43/S0444350.html

offensive term: an offensive term for a girl or woman who is regarded as unpleasant-looking and sexually promiscuous ( slang insult )
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861734809

reply from: yoda

So, this is your idea of "taking the high road", right?

reply from: faithman

Look, if you're going to make absolute statements, know what you're talking about, okay?
skank:
2 informal, chiefly N. Amer. a sleazy or unpleasant person.
http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/skank?view=uk

3. One who is digustingly foul or filthy and often considered sexually promiscuous. Used especially of a woman or girl.
http://www.bartleby.com/61/43/S0444350.html

offensive term: an offensive term for a girl or woman who is regarded as unpleasant-looking and sexually promiscuous ( slang insult )
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861734809
Some are very much like pro-death skanks, words onl mean what they say they mean reguardless what webster says.

reply from: MayaSharona

Let's see, you joined this forum on July 25th, and already you are an expert on what goes on here, right? I've had many, conversations with FMan about his style and content, he knows my views and I know his. Not only that, countless other posters, mostly proaborts, have protested his use of that term, and his blunt language. But you show up here two days ago, and all of a sudden it's as if no one had ever commented one way or the other, right?
The bottom line is, he has his own way of expressing himself, and as long as the owners of this forum don't object he has every right to that expression. Had you read back a few weeks or even days you would have seen some of the previous discussion that has taken place, but apparently you think this forum started two days ago, right?
Well, guess what? You have the same rights as FMan has! You can continue to carp and moan and groan and attack him as long as the moderators let you....... okay? If you'd rather do that than try to represent the interests of unborn babies, then you have every right to do so..... but I'd appreciate it if you'd lower your claim to something a little less than 100% prolife if you're going to do that, okay?
Indeed I do and I intend to make avail of them.
And I'd like to know from you why, when "Faith"man carps and moans and groans and attacks and abuses and insults, that HE is 100% PROLIFE, yet when I defend myself against HIS attacks, I am NOT?
Somehow that sounds a little one-sided, don't you think?
No, I presume you don't.

reply from: MayaSharona

Look, if you're going to make absolute statements, know what you're talking about, okay?
skank:
2 informal, chiefly N. Amer. a sleazy or unpleasant person.
http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/skank?view=uk
">http://www.askoxford.com/conci...d/skank?view=uk
3. One who is digustingly foul or filthy and often considered sexually promiscuous. Used especially of a woman or girl.
http://www.bartleby.com/61/43/S0444350.html
">http://www.bartleby.com/61/43/S0444350.html
offensive term: an offensive term for a girl or woman who is regarded as unpleasant-looking and sexually promiscuous ( slang insult )
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861734809
Ah yes. The definition is what I said it was.
Not sure I understand your point here, since what you posted corroborates with the definition I stated. "Dirty prostitute" and "filthy slut" means the same thing as: One who is digustingly foul or filthy and often considered sexually promiscuous. Used especially of a woman or girl. What you're trying to claim is like saying "proabort" is NOT the same thing as "pro-choice", when of course it is.
Surely you, the lover of dictionary definitions, are able to understand that.

reply from: MayaSharona

So, this is your idea of "taking the high road", right?
When "Faith"man ceases his attacks on my character, so shall I cease mine on his, as well as my anger and sarcasm. He's been given a free ride and support for far too long.
If it offends you, please follow your own advice. Hit "Ignore."

reply from: faithman

What free ride? I have been given the same freedom, and the same oposition as everyone else. You come in here ballyhooing how wonderful sex ed is, and that I should usurp the stewardship of parents over their 4 year olds, then brag how your a CPCer, and SSSSSOOOOO much better that the activist on the street that send most of your clients to your clean little CPC ivory tower. Ya come baiting a fuss then want me cencored for the fuss you started. Go figure?

reply from: MayaSharona

Mister "Faith"man. I never, in any of my posts, advocated PP educating any child about sex. I did, however, advocate parents teaching their OWN children about sex, and to do it at any early age. I told the story about my friend's child going through "precocious puberty" at age 7, and how traumatizing it was for her because her mother had told her zero about her own body, even though the inevitable was staring her in the face.
You then came back and called my story a "hard case fairytale", then made reference to my "skanky messages", and proceeded to rail on about PP, when not once did I even mention them, but rather, I said that children under the age of 5 should have "minimal sex ed".
Meaning, FROM THEIR OWN PARENTS.
Unless of course, one of the child's parents is you. Then the child will learn about falling from the sky at birth, God's monthly curse, erections are a gift from Satan, etc.
I have great respect for activists at clinics. I've seen some work miracles with women about to kill their children. But I've seen it work not by insults, not by threats, not by banshee-like screams like you seem to be proud of, but rather by insistent and calm dialogue, by placing in the woman's arms babies of their own to demonstrate the gift of children, and the like.
Your tactics would only serve to either frighten or anger pregnant women even more. Wonder how many children you could've saved from the suction tube had you only used rational and compassionate tactics rather than insults? Many, probably.

reply from: faithman

Mister "Faith"man. I never, in any of my posts, advocated PP educating any child about sex. I did, however, advocate parents teaching their OWN children about sex, and to do it at any early age. I told the story about my friend's child going through "precocious puberty" at age 7, and how traumatizing it was for her because her mother had told her zero about her own body, even though the inevitable was staring her in the face.
You then came back and called my story a "hard case fairytale", then made reference to my "skanky messages", and proceeded to rail on about PP, when not once did I even mention them, but rather, I said that children under the age of 5 should have "minimal sex ed".
Meaning, FROM THEIR OWN PARENTS.
Unless of course, one of the child's parents is you. Then the child will learn about falling from the sky at birth, God's monthly curse, erections are a gift from Satan, etc.
I have great respect for activists at clinics. I've seen some work miracles with women about to kill their children. But I've seen it work not by insults, not by threats, not by banshee-like screams like you seem to be proud of, but rather by insistent and calm dialogue, by placing in the woman's arms babies of their own to demonstrate the gift of children, and the like.
Your tactics would only serve to either frighten or anger pregnant women even more. Wonder how many children you could've saved from the suction tube had you only used rational and compassionate tactics rather than insults? Many, probably.
You make a lot of wrong assumptions in your post. Just what tactics have I posted here, other than showing the pictures of pre-born life? You are a false accusser, and if the truth be known, the first fuss I had on this forum was with yodavetor over the bloody pictures. You might ask him which poster he uses at the mill.

reply from: whydeath

As do I. I do not think violent protests of screaming protesters are the answer to helping a woman choose life for her child. When someone yells or screams at me or calls me names I am less likely to listen to what they have to say. One the other hand someone who calmly comes up to me, introduces themselves and presents their issues with respect will have my attention.
I understand there are many different tactics on saving baby life's and if life's are being saved then I applaud them. However, I think you have a point when you said (I am not directing to anyone) "Wonder how many children you could've saved from the suction tube had you only used rational and compassionate tactics rather than insults? Many, probably"
I think we often too easily and proudly say "we saved 5 today" vs "maybe if we would have approached that young woman differently we would have saved 6".
Anyway keep up the work with the CPC's.

reply from: MayaSharona

Mister "Faith"man. I never, in any of my posts, advocated PP educating any child about sex. I did, however, advocate parents teaching their OWN children about sex, and to do it at any early age. I told the story about my friend's child going through "precocious puberty" at age 7, and how traumatizing it was for her because her mother had told her zero about her own body, even though the inevitable was staring her in the face.
You then came back and called my story a "hard case fairytale", then made reference to my "skanky messages", and proceeded to rail on about PP, when not once did I even mention them, but rather, I said that children under the age of 5 should have "minimal sex ed".
Meaning, FROM THEIR OWN PARENTS.
Unless of course, one of the child's parents is you. Then the child will learn about falling from the sky at birth, God's monthly curse, erections are a gift from Satan, etc.
I have great respect for activists at clinics. I've seen some work miracles with women about to kill their children. But I've seen it work not by insults, not by threats, not by banshee-like screams like you seem to be proud of, but rather by insistent and calm dialogue, by placing in the woman's arms babies of their own to demonstrate the gift of children, and the like.
Your tactics would only serve to either frighten or anger pregnant women even more. Wonder how many children you could've saved from the suction tube had you only used rational and compassionate tactics rather than insults? Many, probably.
You make a lot of wrong assumptions in your post. Just what tactics have I posted here, other than showing the pictures of pre-born life? You are a false accusser, and if the truth be known, the first fuss I had on this forum was with yodavetor over the bloody pictures. You might ask him which poster he uses at the mill.
Referring to pro-life women as SKANKS, for starters, dude.
Please don't pull on your innocent face now, ok? I'm going to be ill if you do.

reply from: MayaSharona

As do I. I do not think violent protests of screaming protesters are the answer to helping a woman choose life for her child. When someone yells or screams at me or calls me names I am less likely to listen to what they have to say. One the other hand someone who calmly comes up to me, introduces themselves and presents their issues with respect will have my attention.
I understand there are many different tactics on saving baby life's and if life's are being saved then I applaud them. However, I think you have a point when you said (I am not directing to anyone) "Wonder how many children you could've saved from the suction tube had you only used rational and compassionate tactics rather than insults? Many, probably"
I think we often too easily and proudly say "we saved 5 today" vs "maybe if we would have approached that young woman differently we would have saved 6".
Anyway keep up the work with the CPC's.
Thank you. I will.

reply from: faithman

Mister "Faith"man. I never, in any of my posts, advocated PP educating any child about sex. I did, however, advocate parents teaching their OWN children about sex, and to do it at any early age. I told the story about my friend's child going through "precocious puberty" at age 7, and how traumatizing it was for her because her mother had told her zero about her own body, even though the inevitable was staring her in the face.
You then came back and called my story a "hard case fairytale", then made reference to my "skanky messages", and proceeded to rail on about PP, when not once did I even mention them, but rather, I said that children under the age of 5 should have "minimal sex ed".
Meaning, FROM THEIR OWN PARENTS.
Unless of course, one of the child's parents is you. Then the child will learn about falling from the sky at birth, God's monthly curse, erections are a gift from Satan, etc.
I have great respect for activists at clinics. I've seen some work miracles with women about to kill their children. But I've seen it work not by insults, not by threats, not by banshee-like screams like you seem to be proud of, but rather by insistent and calm dialogue, by placing in the woman's arms babies of their own to demonstrate the gift of children, and the like.
Your tactics would only serve to either frighten or anger pregnant women even more. Wonder how many children you could've saved from the suction tube had you only used rational and compassionate tactics rather than insults? Many, probably.
You make a lot of wrong assumptions in your post. Just what tactics have I posted here, other than showing the pictures of pre-born life? You are a false accusser, and if the truth be known, the first fuss I had on this forum was with yodavetor over the bloody pictures. You might ask him which poster he uses at the mill.
Referring to pro-life women as SKANKS, for starters, dude.
Please don't pull on your innocent face now, ok? I'm going to be ill if you do.
Now your shifting issues again. You implied what I do at clinics, which is a lie. Now you want to go back to another issue. just which one do want to discuss, or do you intend to continue to take everything I have said out of context, and jump all over the place. Where have I ever advocated screeming at women at the clinics? The only tactic I have promoted for public display at clinics and for young children is the fiber optic photos which can be viewed in my every post. Every true pro-life woman who has asked me for a free sample has gotten them, and I have not called every woman a skank on this forum as you have point blank implied.

reply from: faithman

So, this is your idea of "taking the high road", right?
When "Faith"man ceases his attacks on my character, so shall I cease mine on his, as well as my anger and sarcasm. He's been given a free ride and support for far too long.
If it offends you, please follow your own advice. Hit "Ignore."
I can't attack what does not exist.

reply from: MayaSharona

Mister "Faith"man. I never, in any of my posts, advocated PP educating any child about sex. I did, however, advocate parents teaching their OWN children about sex, and to do it at any early age. I told the story about my friend's child going through "precocious puberty" at age 7, and how traumatizing it was for her because her mother had told her zero about her own body, even though the inevitable was staring her in the face.
You then came back and called my story a "hard case fairytale", then made reference to my "skanky messages", and proceeded to rail on about PP, when not once did I even mention them, but rather, I said that children under the age of 5 should have "minimal sex ed".
Meaning, FROM THEIR OWN PARENTS.
Unless of course, one of the child's parents is you. Then the child will learn about falling from the sky at birth, God's monthly curse, erections are a gift from Satan, etc.
I have great respect for activists at clinics. I've seen some work miracles with women about to kill their children. But I've seen it work not by insults, not by threats, not by banshee-like screams like you seem to be proud of, but rather by insistent and calm dialogue, by placing in the woman's arms babies of their own to demonstrate the gift of children, and the like.
Your tactics would only serve to either frighten or anger pregnant women even more. Wonder how many children you could've saved from the suction tube had you only used rational and compassionate tactics rather than insults? Many, probably.
You make a lot of wrong assumptions in your post. Just what tactics have I posted here, other than showing the pictures of pre-born life? You are a false accusser, and if the truth be known, the first fuss I had on this forum was with yodavetor over the bloody pictures. You might ask him which poster he uses at the mill.
Referring to pro-life women as SKANKS, for starters, dude.
Please don't pull on your innocent face now, ok? I'm going to be ill if you do.
Now your shifting issues again. You implied what I do at clinics, which is a lie. Now you want to go back to another issue. just which one do want to discuss, or do you intend to continue to take everything I have said out of context, and jump all over the place. Where have I ever advocated screeming at women at the clinics? The only tactic I have promoted for public display at clinics and for young children is the fiber optic photos which can be viewed in my every post. Every true pro-life woman who has asked me for a free sample has gotten them, and I have not called every woman a skank on this forum as you have point blank implied.
You are what you are. You scream insults here, on this board, to people you've never met face to face. To PRO-LIFERS. Like ME. I am not the only pro-lifer to have taken offense to your attacks, either. Ask Carole about that. Another Pro-lifer.
So do you really want me to believe that you do not scream YOU STINKING DEATHSKANK! in the faces of girls going into clinics?
When I believe that a bunny brings me Hershey eggs at Eastertime, I will.

reply from: faithman

Mister "Faith"man. I never, in any of my posts, advocated PP educating any child about sex. I did, however, advocate parents teaching their OWN children about sex, and to do it at any early age. I told the story about my friend's child going through "precocious puberty" at age 7, and how traumatizing it was for her because her mother had told her zero about her own body, even though the inevitable was staring her in the face.
You then came back and called my story a "hard case fairytale", then made reference to my "skanky messages", and proceeded to rail on about PP, when not once did I even mention them, but rather, I said that children under the age of 5 should have "minimal sex ed".
Meaning, FROM THEIR OWN PARENTS.
Unless of course, one of the child's parents is you. Then the child will learn about falling from the sky at birth, God's monthly curse, erections are a gift from Satan, etc.
I have great respect for activists at clinics. I've seen some work miracles with women about to kill their children. But I've seen it work not by insults, not by threats, not by banshee-like screams like you seem to be proud of, but rather by insistent and calm dialogue, by placing in the woman's arms babies of their own to demonstrate the gift of children, and the like.
Your tactics would only serve to either frighten or anger pregnant women even more. Wonder how many children you could've saved from the suction tube had you only used rational and compassionate tactics rather than insults? Many, probably.
You make a lot of wrong assumptions in your post. Just what tactics have I posted here, other than showing the pictures of pre-born life? You are a false accusser, and if the truth be known, the first fuss I had on this forum was with yodavetor over the bloody pictures. You might ask him which poster he uses at the mill.
Referring to pro-life women as SKANKS, for starters, dude.
Please don't pull on your innocent face now, ok? I'm going to be ill if you do.
Now your shifting issues again. You implied what I do at clinics, which is a lie. Now you want to go back to another issue. just which one do want to discuss, or do you intend to continue to take everything I have said out of context, and jump all over the place. Where have I ever advocated screeming at women at the clinics? The only tactic I have promoted for public display at clinics and for young children is the fiber optic photos which can be viewed in my every post. Every true pro-life woman who has asked me for a free sample has gotten them, and I have not called every woman a skank on this forum as you have point blank implied.
You are what you are. You scream insults here, on this board, to people you've never met face to face. To PRO-LIFERS. Like ME. I am not the only pro-lifer to have taken offense to your attacks, either. Ask Carole about that. Another Pro-lifer.
So do you really want me to believe that you do not scream YOU STINKING DEATHSKANK! in the faces of girls going into clinics?
When I believe that a bunny brings me Hershey eggs at Eastertime, I will.
SSSSSOOOOO you get to make a false accusation with no proof at all? I tell you exactly what tactic I advocate, and have posted numerous times. SSSSOOOO you have taken up the offence of your freind, and come baiting a fight, make false accusations, and bend and twist my words out of context to fit your prejudging of me. HHHMMMM. and im the hater?

reply from: faithman

and by the by, ask your buddy what card she uses and where it came from?

reply from: MayaSharona

Mister "Faith"man. I never, in any of my posts, advocated PP educating any child about sex. I did, however, advocate parents teaching their OWN children about sex, and to do it at any early age. I told the story about my friend's child going through "precocious puberty" at age 7, and how traumatizing it was for her because her mother had told her zero about her own body, even though the inevitable was staring her in the face.
You then came back and called my story a "hard case fairytale", then made reference to my "skanky messages", and proceeded to rail on about PP, when not once did I even mention them, but rather, I said that children under the age of 5 should have "minimal sex ed".
Meaning, FROM THEIR OWN PARENTS.
Unless of course, one of the child's parents is you. Then the child will learn about falling from the sky at birth, God's monthly curse, erections are a gift from Satan, etc.
I have great respect for activists at clinics. I've seen some work miracles with women about to kill their children. But I've seen it work not by insults, not by threats, not by banshee-like screams like you seem to be proud of, but rather by insistent and calm dialogue, by placing in the woman's arms babies of their own to demonstrate the gift of children, and the like.
Your tactics would only serve to either frighten or anger pregnant women even more. Wonder how many children you could've saved from the suction tube had you only used rational and compassionate tactics rather than insults? Many, probably.
You make a lot of wrong assumptions in your post. Just what tactics have I posted here, other than showing the pictures of pre-born life? You are a false accusser, and if the truth be known, the first fuss I had on this forum was with yodavetor over the bloody pictures. You might ask him which poster he uses at the mill.
Referring to pro-life women as SKANKS, for starters, dude.
Please don't pull on your innocent face now, ok? I'm going to be ill if you do.
Now your shifting issues again. You implied what I do at clinics, which is a lie. Now you want to go back to another issue. just which one do want to discuss, or do you intend to continue to take everything I have said out of context, and jump all over the place. Where have I ever advocated screeming at women at the clinics? The only tactic I have promoted for public display at clinics and for young children is the fiber optic photos which can be viewed in my every post. Every true pro-life woman who has asked me for a free sample has gotten them, and I have not called every woman a skank on this forum as you have point blank implied.
You are what you are. You scream insults here, on this board, to people you've never met face to face. To PRO-LIFERS. Like ME. I am not the only pro-lifer to have taken offense to your attacks, either. Ask Carole about that. Another Pro-lifer.
So do you really want me to believe that you do not scream YOU STINKING DEATHSKANK! in the faces of girls going into clinics?
When I believe that a bunny brings me Hershey eggs at Eastertime, I will.
SSSSSOOOOO you get to make a false accusation with no proof at all? I tell you exactly what tactic I advocate, and have posted numerous times. SSSSOOOO you have taken up the offence of your freind, and come baiting a fight, make false accusations, and bend and twist my words out of context to fit your prejudging of me. HHHMMMM. and im the hater?
Uh YEAAAAAAAAAAAAH now you got it, finally! Hooray! Just like you accused me of being part and party of Planned Parenthood, I accuse you of screaming tactics at clinics.
Which accusation do you think is true? Me being a PP-lover, or you being a screaming banshee at clinics, after you have demonstrated yourself as being one here with bells on. If you can call ME, a pro-lifer, of being a SKANK, what do you call those entering clinics? F*ing skanks?
You know, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, as they say.
And now, I must depart for a while. Busy weekend ahead. So I wish you all well for now. Yes, even you, "Faith"man. Try not to screech in anyone's face this weekend. Try some compassion instead. It works better than unbridled anger in changing someone's mind every time.

reply from: yoda

FMan spends a lot of time here attempting to defend unborn babies, and he doesn't have a sig that brags about his "prolife percentage". So far, all I've seen you do here is attack FMan. When are you going to start fighting for the babies?
Here's a good place to start: What do you think of that low life, scum-bag baby-killing POS George "Killer" Tiller? Have you ever heard of any human being that has sunk so low into absolute, complete moral degenerate depravity?

reply from: yoda

Strange... I didn't see the word "prostitute" in any of those definitions.... and you did?
No, it doesn't: slut . noun a slovenly or promiscuous woman. Now, do you know what "promiscuous" means, or do you need that defined also? (Hint: "Prostitutes" GET PAID, "sluts" don't.)
So, you are being a bit sarcastic about my use of dictionaries? You don't like that? Hmmm....... interesting....
Ah, so you are comfortable being on the "same level" as FMan? His vocabulary is bothersome, but yours is okay?
What do you mean "far too long"? Have you been posting here under another name? What name?

reply from: yoda

Hey FMan, do you remember the other day when that disciple of Killer Tiller came in here and remarked that she/he was going to invite a bunch of her/his friends to come here? Well, I didn't expect they would arrive with big "proabort" signs on them, ya know?

reply from: faithman

FMan spends a lot of time here attempting to defend unborn babies, and he doesn't have a sig that brags about his "prolife percentage". So far, all I've seen you do here is attack FMan. When are you going to start fighting for the babies?
Here's a good place to start: What do you think of that low life, scum-bag baby-killing POS George "Killer" Tiller? Have you ever heard of any human being that has sunk so low into absolute, complete moral degenerate depravity?
Ya know yoda, she came in here spoiling for a fight by siding with "sex ed" that is mostly run by PP. Then after starting a fuss by acting like a skank, she gets made cause she is called on it, and starts to parade all the wonderful things she does while accussing me of tactics I have never posted that I agree with. Then when I post over and over again what I do, and what i do agree with, she falsely accusses me again of the tactics. And just how do you screem on a forum anyway? And just how many times have I called her a skank sence she claims to be pro-life? But it took a skank coment for her to supposedly show us her true colors. I have first, last, and always advocated the use of the fiber optic photos, as I have seen they do the most good in my experiance. It is the best way to let the womb child speak for themselves. And I will continue to give them out free to anyone who wants them.

reply from: 4given

I made no "skankish statements", dear boy. None. I made no reference whatsoever to your precious Planned Parenthood that you seem to be so obsessed over I think that you secretly support them.
Which accusation do you think is true? Me being a PP-lover, or you being a screaming banshee at clinics, after you have demonstrated yourself as being one here with bells on. If you can call ME, a pro-lifer, of being a SKANK, what do you call those entering clinics? F*ing skanks?
By and by faithman has advocated the use of I AM A PERSON cards because they are effective w/out a word being said. He has sent them to countless homes across the country, free of charge for those that have a desire to do something. He has often stated that the card itself is enough. His own advice to me was to display the card silently, and to only engage those who approach me.
You rush to judgment w/out being clear about who he is outside of this forum. And I am not saying that he too hasn't rushed to judgement about you. You accuse him of innappropriate behavior and language and engage in it as well. What you do for the women on the street is wonderful. What he does for the unborn by supply of the I AM A PERSON cards is also wonderful. Personal opinions aside, you both are after the same thing- saving an unborn child from a brutal death. I think it would be best if you both stuck to that.

reply from: faithman

NNNNAAAA. I think she is the post abortion lady, who cares more about the hurt little feelings of killers more than the ones they have killed. She came spoiling for a fight and baited one from the beginning. This was the same person who said they got the I AM A PERSON cards, and bragged how good they are, then turns around and attacks the one who produced them. Go figure?

reply from: yoda

Maybe so... seems very strange for someone whose name is only two days old to be lecturing us on how things have been going around here "for too long", ya know? Is two days "too long"?

reply from: faithman

Thats just the attitude of CPCers. They look down their long snouts at the street activist. It is a good thing they don't stand at the clinics, bcause if it rained they would drowned with them naustrils so high in the air.

reply from: 4given

There is a place for everyone. God wants to use those for His glory- as long as we are all accomplishing the same thing- the saving of womb children. I respect anyone taking action where and when they are led to.

reply from: faithman

Yes mam. noted, and considered.

reply from: Teresa18

Yes, it is a word.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sexualize

The doctor doesn't have to do that with all kids. The doctor can just ask if they are growing hair around their private areas. The doctor also should be able to see if a child is developing breasts. It's not as though they are invisible. Plus, often times parents still see their kids naked when they only 8 to 10 years old, especially if that parent is of the same sex. A kid can always ask mom or dad when beginning to develop or the school nurse, and their parents and nurse can answer any questions. Of course there is a difference in a doctor examining a child inside of a doctor's office and not doing so inside a park. Kids generally understand the concept that a doctor must check them out in order to keep them healthy. A kid understands it would be odd for a person in the park or a random person to check his/her heartbeat, blood pressure, ears, nose, throat, stomach, etc. As far as molestation, all the school would need to say to the kids on the matter is that it is wrong if another person touches or plays with their private parts. Kids generally understand that private parts mean the areas where they go to the bathroom.
Not all children engage in "sex play" from a young age. I have never met a child that does before. The earlier kids are taught about sex and exposed to it, the sooner they will begin to engage in sexual behaviors. When little 7 and 8 year old children know what sex is and how to have it, I would not be surprised if some try it out. They are too young to learn about such things. They should be playing games, with toys, reading fairy tales, and believing in Santa Clause, not learning about sex. People should be exposed to info about sex long before they are exposed to the act itself. Teaching middle schoolers is soon enough, and, in most cases, before they are exposed to the act itself. If kids are having sex in or before middle school, then obviously they have already learned about it anyway.
Are you claiming that a two or three year old who sees mommy and daddy having sex needs to know the full extent of what is going on? Should a class of two and three year olds be taught about the penis being inserted into the vagina because one or two may walk in on their parents having sex? Why not just teach them from the moment they are allowed to walk and talk then?
We can't "keep them ignorant" forever, but we can expose them at a proper time, like middle school, not when they are in kindergarten or elementary school. Who is "we"? The public schools? Parents or a school nurse (with the parent's permission) can answer any questions a child has regarding sex before middle school. Once middle school starts, then these things can be taught. Parents should be able to opt their out if they so choose, of course. You mock when parents teach their children. They can teach them whenever they want. They are their children. You may disagree, but you don't have the right to act as though "we" (I'm assuming the government schools) know more than the parents. They aren't the schools' kids. They are the parents' kids, and the parents' know when and what they want their children being taught.
I think you liberals have repressed religion enough. Sex is everywhere in our culture. It is all over the media, papers, radio, TV, and internet. It's in the schools. STDs are soaring. Teen pregnancies have decreased but are still high. Out of wedlock pregnancies have gone up in other age groups. What was/is pushed? Free sex with birth control was/is pushed. What is the answer to when these things fail? Free sex with birth control is. It's time to turn around on the trail. It's time to stop pushing sex at every turn. Push abstinence and instill morals in children. You have no proof "the most ill adapted in society have come from ultra religious backgrounds". Sex is wrong outside of marriage. If I want to teach my future children that or parents want to teach their children that, that should be their prerogative. Not everyone should have to accept the free sex mantra.
You or public/government schools have absolutely NO RIGHT to teach (more like indoctrinate) my or any other parent's child on such a sensitive and moral issue as sex. Parents have the right to teach this in their own way with their own value set. Kids from Catholic schools and Christian schools are just as bright as kids from public/government schools. I think "Fundy" parents are doing ok.
I am going away for a week starting Sunday. I may not be able to respond until I get back.

reply from: carolemarie

Thats just the attitude of CPCers. They look down their long snouts at the street activist. It is a good thing they don't stand at the clinics, bcause if it rained they would drowned with them naustrils so high in the air.
Not all of them do. I work on the street and at the CPC's. We need the CPC's because women need help to keep their babies. The free sonograms and help with money and emotional support helps those women choose life. We need to have CPC's and we also need to have people in front of the clinic's offereing help. Building relationships takes time, and those at the CPC's don't know the street activist and before they can trust you they need to know you. People have been afraid of being sued and also think that we yell at women or are mean. Who would want to be associated with that? When they learn what actually goes down, they change their viewpoint.
Carole
The CPC we work with use to not like the street activist and wouldn't work with us. But we worked hard to support them and earn their trust, and now we work as partners.

reply from: yoda

Well I for one am happy to hear that. Where I go, we've worked hard, supported them, and have been treated like dirt in return. They actually seem to take sides with the abortion clinic against us. It's like "the people in buildings against the street people". But that's just our little local problem.
And I think this "Maya" person is much the same, probably a proabort masquerading as a prolifer and trying to stir up trouble here. Not worth our time, really.

reply from: BKennedy4Life

The problem with "age appropriate" sex-ed is with who gets to determine "age appropriate."
As has been stated, many first rubs with sex ed comes from Planned Parenthood. PP only views minors as future cash cows for contraceptives and abortion. if they're in a class with an 11 year old that tells them she's been raped and feels strange in her tummy, they view that as a chance to earn some cash.
"Oh, don't tell your parents, we'll take care of you so you won't be embarrassed." When Planned Parenthood is the arbiter of "age appropriate" and responsible for the content, no good can come of it.

reply from: MayaSharona

When are you going to start fighting for the babies?
Here's a good place to start: What do you think of that low life, scum-bag baby-killing POS George "Killer" Tiller? Have you ever heard of any human being that has sunk so low into absolute, complete moral degenerate depravity?
I fight for babies every day, Yodavater. Every minute of every day. What do you do? Beside be online much of your time and quote from dictionaries?
Killer Tiller needs to have his head ripped off, like he has done to many a baby in the womb. What did you think I thought of him? Did you think I'd invite him over for coffee? Play Scrabble, maybe?
Strange... I didn't see the word "prostitute" in any of those definitions.... and you did?
No, it doesn't: slut . noun a slovenly or promiscuous woman. Now, do you know what "promiscuous" means, or do you need that defined also? (Hint: "Prostitutes" GET PAID, "sluts" don't.)
So, you are being a bit sarcastic about my use of dictionaries? You don't like that? Hmmm....... interesting....
Ah, so you are comfortable being on the "same level" as FMan? His vocabulary is bothersome, but yours is okay?
What do you mean "far too long"? Have you been posting here under another name? What name?
Yodavater, first, if you had read anything I posted other than what you selectively cherry-picked, you would already know that I have said, more than once here, that although I am new at posting here, I am NOT NEW AT READING HERE. You may look those underlined, capitalized words up in the dictionary if you require definitions to them. I'm just sayin.
It also seems that you support "Faith"man's use of the oft-repeated term SKANK to pro-life women on this board, since you interjected on his behalf in a disagreement that concerned you not at all. You also are wizard at slicing a hair 69,486 times. The only difference between "prostitute" and "slut" is the exchange of money. Both do the same thing, dear. Or...would you not consider a prostitute a "skank"? But...you (and I) consider a fetus a baby, right? I know I do! How then could you not consider a prostitute a "skank"?
Beats me. Do you consider a prostitute a fine, upstanding, law-abiding, virtuous woman? No? Then...she must be a skank, right? Then...a prostitute and a slut are BOTH skanks, right? If it walks like a skank and smells like a skank, *slaps head*, it must be a skank.
Problem solved! Unless...you DO consider a prostitute a fine, upstanding, law-abiding, virtuous woman? If so, I do stand corrected. Then, to you, a prositute would NOT mean a "skank".
The bottom line here is that I objected to "Faith"man's usage of the word SKANK in my direction. You objected to my objection. For some unimaginable reason.
But...I was never talking to you, dear. I'm still not. You force me to answer by virtue of your buttinskiness, as old men usually exhibit.
How many babies have died while you frequently do this, I wonder? Just to prove your superiority? Many, I would suspect. Dubious congrats to you, old man!

reply from: MayaSharona

Hey ScummieBoy. I am more pro-life than you'll ever be, guaranteed. All you do is wave your Bible around and scream SKANK in pro-LIFE women's faces.
So you and Yodeekadodee put your little loser heads together and come up with whatever fables you want about me.
In the meantime, I'll be at Choices of the Heart, saving children. But you'll both be here, talking about how great you are.
NNNNAAAA. I think she is the post abortion lady, who cares more about the hurt little feelings of killers more than the ones they have killed. She came spoiling for a fight and baited one from the beginning. This was the same person who said they got the I AM A PERSON cards, and bragged how good they are, then turns around and attacks the one who produced them. Go figure?

reply from: 4given

Maya- Are you here to engage in discussion that is abortion related or to insult those that are? I am hoping you can rise above this pettiness and respond to some other threads that are not about you- unless you prefer the attention be on you?

reply from: yoda

Well, Maya, that narrows it down. Obviously you're not a prolifer, or you'd be posting something to refute what some of these bortheads are saying about how wonderful it is to kill babies......no, you'd rather attack other prolifers and argue about word definitions....... so, scratch prolifer.....
I'd say you've either been posting here under another name, and had a run-in with FMan, or you're a proabort a-hole who is just trying to stir up trouble. Either way you're not worth my time. I'm going to take your suggestion, and put you on ignore, because I have better things to do with my time. I suggest you continue your little spat with FMan by private message, email, or some other means that won't disrupt the forum like some whinning brat whose feeling have been hurt. Get a life, whoever you really are, and quit claiming to be a friend of unborn babies... because you're not.

reply from: MayaSharona

LOL. This old man forgets that I, a pro-lifer, was attacked FIRST on this forum while he not only did not come to my defense, he objected to my objecting to being attacked by "Faith"man.
Just more Alzheimeric ramblings from a self-righteous old man who has nothing better to do with his time. Pffft. Put me on Ignore, Yodee. Please.
I do have something better to do.
Today I counseled a frightened 15 year old girl who was seriously considering abortion. She comes from a strict, middle-class family, and she was afraid her parents would disown her if they were to learn she is pregnant. The father of the child...worthless. A 16-year-old self-absorbed male prima-donna who's a big jock on the football team and who pokes and runs. No chance of any support from him.
The girl didn't want her baby. She was afraid to raise it alone, with no support from her family, or her friends for that matter. Still, there was something inside her that made me realize that although she might have gone through with the abortion, she would've been haunted for the rest of her life by the act of killing her child. She wasn't evil, she wasn't cavalier. She wasn't even sexually promiscuous. She got pregnant...on her first sexual encounter, after being promised unending love. Then the guy books. Same old story.
I arranged a meeting with her parents and her at our facility. The parents were indeed shocked that their daughter was pregnant, but in no way did they react as she feared they would. They were indignant and angry at first, but 1) they did NOT want her to have an abortion, and 2) they would NEVER have thrown her out of the house. In her extreme fear and uncertainty, the girl would've went to a clinic, swallowed the lies they would've fed her there, and killed her baby. And suffered the lifelong consequences afterward.
But this didn't happen! After the meeting, the girl and her parents hugged and pledged support to each other, and they went home to begin planning for the arrival of the baby.
I felt very good afterward. I have to admit.

reply from: carolemarie

LOL. This old man forgets that I, a pro-lifer, was attacked FIRST on this forum while he not only did not come to my defense, he objected to my objecting to being attacked by "Faith"man.
Just more Alzheimeric ramblings from a self-righteous old man who has nothing better to do with his time. Pffft. Put me on Ignore, Yodee. Please.
I do have something better to do.
Today I counseled a frightened 15 year old girl who was seriously considering abortion. She comes from a strict, middle-class family, and she was afraid her parents would disown her if they were to learn she is pregnant. The father of the child...worthless. A 16-year-old self-absorbed male prima-donna who's a big jock on the football team and who pokes and runs. No chance of any support from him.
The girl didn't want her baby. She was afraid to raise it alone, with no support from her family, or her friends for that matter. Still, there was something inside her that made me realize that although she might have gone through with the abortion, she would've been haunted for the rest of her life by the act of killing her child. She wasn't evil, she wasn't cavalier. She wasn't even sexually promiscuous. She got pregnant...on her first sexual encounter, after being promised unending love. Then the guy books. Same old story.
I arranged a meeting with her parents and her at our facility. The parents were indeed shocked that their daughter was pregnant, but in no way did they react as she feared they would. They were indignant and angry at first, but 1) they did NOT want her to have an abortion, and 2) they would NEVER have thrown her out of the house. In her extreme fear and uncertainty, the girl would've went to a clinic, swallowed the lies they would've fed her there, and killed her baby. And suffered the lifelong consequences afterward.
But this didn't happen! After the meeting, the girl and her parents hugged and pledged support to each other, and they went home to begin planning for the arrival of the baby.
I felt very good afterward. I have to admit.

reply from: carolemarie

That is a shame about the CPC in your town! I would keep trying because "Blessed are the peacemakers" and you both are trying to do the same thing. Get one of the Christian's in your group to go talk to them and discuss this biblically with them. You need to find away to work together and it is worth the effort you have to put forth. You can help more women and save more lives.
As for the other poster, I don't blame her for not liking to be called a skank! It is a incredibly rude and vicious way to talk to women. You can disagree with someone without using demeaning sexually crude statements to label them.
I tried to not respond in kind, but that is hard when you feel attacked. So I resorted to putting the rude poster on ignore. That doesn't mean that the I am a person cards are not good or that people shouldn't use them. But I don't want to be called names. Life is to short to get involved in nasty name calling.
Carole

reply from: yoda

Yes, it is. We've gone the extra mile, and now we wait for a change in their attitude... but we're not holding our breath.
BTW, thanks a lot for posting that little rant from "Maya", whom I just put on iggy..... did you want to make sure I saw it? Did you want to rub it in my face, maybe? Is Maya your alias, maybe?

reply from: 4given

I think Maya was looking for a "job well done!" I am pleased she had some good news to share. Yoda, I haven't seen a post where you glorify your deeds, when in fact you have saved a life or changed a mind. Great work to you as well Yoda! Some may not appreciate you, but there are people in the world- alive and well because of your dedication!

reply from: yoda

Maybe so, 4given...... there's an old saying that he who toots his own horn can't get anyone else to toot it..... I would hope that all of the prolifers who post here would try to do some prolife work away from the forum, and NOT brag about it here. If a prolifer spends time here, it ought to be to stand up for the unborn, not to get revenge for bruised egos. Pettiness and vindictiveness takes a lot of energy away from what we ought to be doing, and I thank you for all your efforts to get everyone back on track.

reply from: MayaSharona

If we can't share the good we've done for the cause of stopping abortion, then what exactly is this forum for? Being keyboard crusaders? Venting our spleen against the atrocity of abortion and those who support it? We all know it's an atrocity, nothing new there.
I posted my "rant" as Yodee so enviously called it because it is uplifting, it gives hope that minds and hearts CAN be changed, and that this cause isn't just about screaming in the faces of confused women as they approach an abortion clinic.
If it "bothers" some of you to read an uplifting story and how compassion and understanding caused a child to be born that would've otherwise lay ripped apart in a medical waste bin, then do as Yodee did and put me on Ignore. Please. Because I will continue to share them.

reply from: 4given

Whatever Maya- when are you going to join in and fight for these children w/ the obvious war that is against the very people telling the girls you see to abort her child? And w/out explaining what an abortion is and does? Step up here. I am anxious to see how you defend the unborn against those that slaughter and advocate the slaughter of them. Join in- I am happy to have you fighting for what is right!- I want you to!

reply from: gotfetus

In about 5 years, when we get the North American Union, pro-life activity will be out lawed all to gether. Then you dummies can fight over a piece of bread in prison. Your are kind of entertaining though. You are stupid enough to think you make some kind of dfference. Laughable indeed.

reply from: yoda

Well put, 4given, well put!

reply from: 4given

Thank you Yoda. I was being sincere.

reply from: Teresa18

I disagree. The younger you expose children to sex and sexual behavior, the younger they are sexualized.
Are you actually saying that you see the need to teach children the full details of what child molesters may due to them if they ever catch them? Do you think five year old children should be told about being beaten, the details of sex, oral sex, anal sex, etc. in the rare instance they may be a victim?
I don't believe kids are that stupid. Kids usually understand private parts are what is covered by underwear. I knew that from when I was young.
Sure kids may "play with themselves", but that is out of general curiosity about the human body than about sexual thoughts or feelings. As far as parents seeing their children, 10 is pushing it. I am saying that the parent of the same sex may see their child without clothing, especially if helping them get dressed (girls need help with clothing like dresses), or at the pool locker room, public restroom, if they were to get ill or very dirty, etc. I have no clue about other Catholic views on this topic so please do not attack the entire Church over my views.
Sexual desires are normal, but they do not have to be acted upon. I mean that children do not have to masturbate to every desire or go out and act on those desires with a member of the opposite sex. My Church teaches masturbation is a sin so it is something I try to avoid. Yes, young children touch themselves, but much of that is out of curiosity, and the fact children don't understand why it is wrong to go around, and touch certain parts of their body but not others.
Excuse me? I had sex ed in school. My parents gave me the facts, and I could and still can talk to them openly about sex. You have a lot of nerve insinuating that I wasn't taught properly in school, and my parents did a poor job. My school and parents did a great job. It is a cheap ploy to try to use me as a reason why sex ed should be taught in schools regardless of parental consent.
Children touching their body parts out of curiosity and lack of knowledge do not make them "sexual". Children aren't born with understanding of masturbation, sex for pleasure, and reproduction. This stuff is learned and taught. Repression from playing with privates and masturbation/sex will have to occur when puberty begins.
The majority of kids do not have sex before middle school. All children do not need to be exposed for the sake of a few. Middle school is time before the majority is exposed to the act itself.
My aunt's dogs used to do that when I was little, but I thought they did it because they "liked" each other. I didn't understand about people until I was much older. I don't believe schools should teach the mechanics of sex until middle school. If parents would like to teach it before then, that is their choice. My point is that you say that children should be taught sex ed because they are "sexual" from an early age, may see their mother and father, may be exposed at school, or may be molested. Those same things could happen to a three year old as well. A three year old may play with his/herself (not that I consider that sexual), may see their parents, hear things at preschool, or be molested. Why not teach them? I do consider it perverted to teach five year olds about sex. I do not consider you a pervert, but I think teaching five year olds about sex is perverted.
Just because a parent may not want their kid to learn about sex until middle school or would prefer to teach them themselves, doesn't mean the schools can override the parents, and teach their kids anyway. That can't happen in this country. After all, parents can home school, or send their kids to a private school. You may disagree with the parents, but they are not your kids. This is not a socialistic country, and the state can't take the kids from the parents unless the parents are neglecting or abusing their children. Not teaching sex ed in the manner you approve of or the values you approve of does not warrant children being taken away. Typically, the young kids getting pregnant are not going to be teens whose parents don't wish them learning sex ed in school because of their own morals possibly related to religion. The young kids that get pregnant will be kids who are forced to grow up early, live in rough areas, or have parents that pay them little attention. Generally, most of the kids whose parents don't care will learn about sex when they get to middle school because if the parents don't care one way or the other, they certainly will not bother to pull the kids out of sex ed. Furthermore, there is not a large group of kids getting pregnant or STDs before middle school. Middle school is the appropriate age for sex ed to be taught.
Why is it right in front of children's' faces? Could it be because it is promoted in schools, clothing, music, tv, magazines, movies, and the media? STDs may have increased, but teen pregnancy has decreased since abstinence education. Pregnancy HAS increased in those older than teenagers who certainly DO know about birth control. It isn't stopping them.
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/aug/07080312.html

Teaching sex without values is part of the problem. Promoting masturbation, foreplay, sex, and birth control (the first two not necessary) at a rate much higher than the best method around, abstinence, is part of the problem. Society needs to have some values. Schools are teaching values when they promote the latter group. They just are teaching values associated with moral relativism and the sexual revolution as opposed to moral absolutes and focus on the family.
I am not "demonizing" you. I am "demonizing" your position which I believe to be wrong. It is not my fault if you are unable to see the difference. You do push birth control as opposed to abstinence, which in effect says sex out of wedlock is acceptable. The main focus of "comprehensive sexual education" classes is on foreplay/sex/birth control, as opposed to abstinence.
http://www.cwalac.org/article_523.shtml

Go to the link to read the entire study which requires PDF. I have not yet read the entire thing.
Our values are not the same on many issues. That is ok. My solutions are different than yours. You prefer to label me a "fundy". If I'm a conservative Christian, than my solution can not be correct to you because you because of my religious beliefs.
Public schools do have an obligation to teach the children of Americans. If it were not for American citizens and their offspring, there would obviously be no need for public schools. Parents send their children to those schools by choice, or if they are unable to send their children to private schools or home school. It is not as though all children have to attend public schools. Parents can and should have an active role in the education of their children. The state shouldn't lock the doors to parents, and indoctrinate children for 6 hours a day without any parental input.
Sex is one of those issues that is hard to separate from morality. The ONLY way to separate sex from morals is to teach the biological aspects of sex. When it comes to abstinence and birth control, people have varying opinions tied to morality. It's funny that you think the school should not teach "morality" in regard to sex, but ignore that the way it is taught is emphasizing a certain morality. In fact, if you review the curriculum of some these sex ed classes, they play games getting kids interested in sex, teach foreplay, types of lubricants, teach homosexual sex and homosexuality is a normal variant from regular sex, abortaficient birth control, and even abortion. Basically, the morality that sex is ok as long as birth control is used. Schools need to really encourage abstinence and its benefits. It's interesting you say that some parents can't even be trusted to teach their kids correctly about sex, but you think these parents can be entrusted to teach their kids about morals. It's likely that if a parent doesn't discuss sex itself, they won't discuss the morality of it. "Fundy" parents have to teach sex itself before they can teach the morality of it. So, if some kids don't have parents to the morality of sex to them, then they won't learn. Maybe they will have sex. Maybe they will use birth control at some times and others not. Schools need to promote abstinence values for all kids, especially those that won't learn it at home. If a parent disagrees or wants their child to have sex, it's likely they'll tell them.
With this post, I am finished discussing this issue. You may post a rebuttal, but I am done responding. I feel we are now just going around in circles. We understand each others positions pretty well, but we just disagree. Neither will change the mind of the other. Your view is based on a liberal, moral relativistic viewpoint grounded off the 60s sexual revolution, and my view is based on a conservative, moral absolutes viewpoint grounded by faith in God and the traditional family.

reply from: Teresa18

As I said, I'm not further discussing this with you. I put "try" because I was trying not to give information one way or the other. The truth is, I do avoid it, and I do not do it because my Church teaches it is morally wrong. That is the truth too.

reply from: carolemarie

I didn't post as the other person. I don't have to hide under an alias! I just had put you on ignore because you were getting me to start to respond in a non-Christ like fashion due to your calling me names. I was trying to ignore the comments but they were getting under my skin, so I just put you on ignore.
That doesn't mean that I don't appreciate the I am a person cards. I think they are great. It doesn't mean that I think you go to the clinic and call people names there. That would be a bit counter productive.
I do think you are bitter towards CPC's because they have been unhelpful and don't support your ministry. However, we need the CPC's and God should be the one who validates your outreach...as much as is is up to you, live in peace with all men. I would counsel you to let it go. They don't have to like you to be effective in helping women chose life. And you should stop with the insults! There is no reason to call women skanks. It is highly insulting.
Carole

reply from: carolemarie

I can't speak for everyone, but at the abortion clinic most groups don't yell and scream at women! That is unfair statement.
I have been doing sidewalk counseling for 12 years, and we don't do that. We are there because we care what happens to that woman as well as the baby! We care about her, her problems and how we can help her do this! We pay light bills and help with food and are a friend!!! We visit and babysit and do laundry and just in general help our sister through the whole thing. We do not scream at her and we are not mean...and we try to stay and be there after the abortion is over to let that woman know that we still care and that there is help and healing even after abortion. This is about sharing the gospel with those who need it and helping them as the bible tells us to. Just like you do at the CPC. But the frontline people are the last ditch effort to reach someone on the way in. They didn't come to the CPC for help, so God sent us there to intervene.
I like hearing the stories of victory. Acutually doing something is better than posting comments on a board. If all the prolife posters would do something rather than just talk, we would see many more babies saved.

reply from: 4given

I totally agree with you- the whole "actions speak louder than words " bit. The forum should also be a place where one can seek guidance as to what to do and how to become more of an activist than an advocate. I have seen a willingness to instructor help whenever the questions arise. Certainly no one should be looking for recognition or praise when that does happen, but a praise report is encouraging to those of us (much like myself) that are just venturing in. This has been an ongoing learning process, and I intend to do what I can with all that I have gained here and elsewhere, just as everyone should. In my opinion..

reply from: coco

Maybe 5 yearolds are not having sex but I saw the sadest thing Last week! I wend to see my doctor( who is right nextdoor to the planned parenthood) and thier were some prolifers up there and it looked like they were trying to stop, a NO older than 12 year old girl from having an abortion!! NOW THAT IS VERY VERY SAD!

reply from: yoda

It sure is. Did you call the police to report the "probable" statutory rape? You do know, don't you, that PP never reports such things?

reply from: tjlsmom

It sure is. Did you call the police to report the "probable" statutory rape? You do know, don't you, that PP never reports such things?
If you do call the police to report it, hopefully they would contact PP and investigate the issue. It is very true that PP never reports suspected cases of statutory rape, even though it's required by law.

reply from: faithman

It sure is. Did you call the police to report the "probable" statutory rape? You do know, don't you, that PP never reports such things?
If you do call the police to report it, hopefully they would contact PP and investigate the issue. It is very true that PP never reports suspected cases of statutory rape, even though it's required by law.
And these are the people pretend pro-lifers want us to turn our kids over to in the public schools for sex ed. Thats what we need to do, turn children over to those who kill womb children, subvert young minds, and conspires to cover the crime of rape. Of course we just need to get into step, because a self professed to be smarter than anybody else, secular humanist monkey boy says so .

reply from: galen

Want to teach sex ed to three year olds?... Go have another baby...
my three year old ( at the time)... was sooooo facinated with his little brother that he would not shut up about it... i was in the hospital a lot and he visited often ;he loved to see the ultrasound machien rolled in...
" the stork" just does not answer the question... mommy why does he live inside you>/ why can't he come out and play now?
Mary

reply from: Teresa18

Teach your children what you want, CP. Don't try to teach my future children or other parents' children.

reply from: Teresa18

Hillary Clinton, is that you? Of course you would think that way. No one can even mention God in schools, so I have no idea why you would even think the Christian view point is shoved down their throat. You better shield your kids from those horrible Christians. After all, you wouldn't want them to love God, respect life from conception to natural death, honor of their parents, treat other people kindly, care about service to others, have clear lines of right and wrong, believe sex is an act that is sacred and should be shared between spouses not out of wedlock or in the sex industry, and have family that goes to Church.
Faithman was right about you all along. Some of your views repulse me. My kids will be taught about sex when I think it is appropriate. They'll go to a Christian school or be homeschooled. The only way they would go to a public school is if I was ensured I could opt them out of sex ed lessons I deem inappropriate. They won't be sitting in a desk listening to some secular humanist teaching them how to masturbate, methods of foreplay, lubricants, and positions of homo sex. Making it mandatory is taking this country one step closer to socialism, but maybe that is what you want.
Besides, in order for your votes to reflect that position (at least nationally), it would mean you aren't voting pro-life. None of the pro-life POTUS candidates support mandatory sex ed. Unless you are planning on voting for a pro-abortion candidate. If you do, I'll have to question the sincerity of your position. If we win one more election, we'll be able to get the last appointment to the Supreme Court to overturn Roe vs. Wade. Perhaps we could even pass something like the Life at Conception Act.

reply from: coco

T18 you talk about communisum yet it is you who want god in school, FYI this is america you have NO RIGHT to impose YOUR religious beliefs on any one whats so ever. And as far as the sex ed you can opt out, and keep your kids uninformed untill YOU fell OK!! And if you and your "right wing, god fearing zelots" get your way you would force EVERYONE to serve YOUR god! now how communist is that? I am a proud "secular humanist" If that means that you care for your children and want the world to be PEACEFUL and TOLERENT place!

reply from: faithman

That is where you are simply wrong. One of the first acts of the American congress was to commission the printing of the bible with tax money. The first text books of America's public schools were heavily reliant on, and filled with scripture. As a matter of fact, the Bible was used as a text book in the public schools way before Charly Darwin plegerized his false monkey theory, which is the very foundation of communism. And if you truely cared for your kids like you say, then you would not turn them over to the secular humanist perverts of Planned Parenthood, that teach "sex ed" in the schools. Secular humanist are the communist, who want to steal children from their parents, and subvert their minds to a godless world view. A view that is most assuredly forced on children every single school day. The most peaceful and tolerant countries that have ever existed on earth, are those whos foundation is a belief in Christ. The most violent, and deadly have been those who embrace evolution, and atheism. Those are just simple historical facts. You are a secular humanist theif and lier who would try to steal the spiritual history of our nation. You force your godlessness upon us, and then want to totally stiffle any view that you don't agree with. When God was in the school, the biggest infractions were chewing gum and talking in class. Sence you wounderful secular humanist have kicked God out, the schools have become one of the most dangerous places to send a child. Murder, rape, drugs, are the norm. If that is PEACE and TOlERENCE, you can have it. You are an ignorant fool, and I feel sorry for any child who has the misfortune to have you for a parent.

reply from: Teresa18

I am saying those are values taught by Christianity that one of no religion should have trouble teaching their kids. In my faith, going to Church is part of being a good Catholic. It doesn't stop at the walls of the Church. We must follow the Church's teachings outside the Church. Some people believe Church stops at the walls which is most certainly not true. I believe the Church is the one true path to Heaven. The Church teaches that other faith communities may contain some truth but not the full truth. God loves all people, and God wants all people to turn to him. I know what has been revealed about God through Scripture and sacred tradition. However, we don't always understand why he allows things to happen the way he does. He could come down himself, but rather he chooses to work through angels, priests, saints, and even the common man. He loves us, and he wants us to accept him via faith in most cases. It's also tough to understand why he allows us to go through some of things we do, but we know that we are supposed to use our suffering to grow closer to him.
I find it horrible that you consider a nation that would not exist as it is today without Christian values to be diseased by Christianity. It greatly saddens me you have such an opinion. This country was founded under one God by Christians. It was founded on freedom of religion. Christians wanted to be able to practice in their own faith communities. However, there is a difference in freedom of religion and freedom from religion. You secular humanists are trying to strip God from this nation so it is an atheist, moral relativist land. Here are some quotes from early in this country's history:
http://www.eadshome.com/QuotesoftheFounders.htm

I find Faithman to be a good person. I think he uses harsh language, but I think he honestly just wants to save the womb child from being slaughtered. I have agreed with you on abortion. I can't claim to be as good of an arguer with you on that topic, but I have strongly disagreed with you on most everything else. Obviously I "whizzed" you off because your response took me forever to read, and it has left me preparing a lengthy response.
You have no clue what my children will and will not know. I will teach them what I think is appropriate according to their age, and they will be able to speak to me freely on this topic. You can make speculations if they so choose. I will take my children to Church, as I will have them baptized Catholic. What repulses me? Well, I am repulsed by your support of drugs, the sex industry, and sex ed. I do not think it should be mandatory because sex is a moral issue. Parents should be able to teach their kids when and what they choose. If a parent doesn't want to teach their kid or doesn't care, it is likely they will allow their kids to take public school sex ed which I don't believe should begin until middle school. I also believe that public school sex ed should place a primary focus upon abstinence, not contraception. Your views of Christianity now repulse me, but I get the feeling that is a two way street, as you seem to act disgusted by the views of most Christians on this forum.
If you would like to be called a "wife beating pedophile", I'll accommodate, but I never thought of you as one. I do consider you to be an atheist, liberal, secular humanist who can be pompous and sometimes even downright nasty. I am labeling you as a secular humanist because you match many of their views. You can label me a religious conservative because I match many of their views. The sex ed classes teach how to masturbate, mutual masturbation, different foreplay "activities", types of lubricants, and positions of homo sex as evidenced by articles from Christian groups opposed to those sections of the curriculum. I learned about basic things in middle school, high school, discussions with my family, and research for moral discussions online. I daresay I know as much as a kid who went through a public school knows. Children should be kept pure until they ask questions parents can answer and reach early puberty in middle school. I do think it is very evil for someone to get into the depth mentioned above at a young age and/or in an environment devoid of morals. I would prefer to teach those things myself in a moral context.
Sex ed is a national issue to some extent, regarding funding for various programs. Bush has supported abstinence and faith based funding. Teen pregnancies have gone down. I do not believe evolution is fact, but I personally have no problem with it being taught. We don't know how God formed the world. Most likely it was not in 7 days time. I believe he did it slowly over time via intelligent design. However, the Church says it is possible God may have formed the world through evolution, instilling a soul in the human being. We learned it in Catholic school. I understand public schools teaching it, but some Christian schools do not. I believe sex ed and evolution are issues that parents should be able to opt their kids out of if they choose because they are interwoven with morality. After all, evolution is not a proven fact. Not even all scientists agree. Lastly, you bold that morality is "subjective". That is a secular humanist belief. Morality is absolute. An absolute morality exists whether people accept that morality or not. If morality is relative, then the "morality" of a serial killer could be declared on the same level as that of a missionary.
You now proceed to get full of yourself after launching personal attacks above. I am questioning your credibility based on statements you made. I have not doubted you are pro-life, but if you are voting for a candidate who is pro-abortion, it is likely they will vote in favor of abortion. Look at some of the Democrats votes on abortion vs. Republicans. Even if you don't like Bush, he has done a lot for the pro-life cause. The best candidate running is Duncan Hunter. He has introduced the Personhood at Conception Act for the past few Congresses. All it requires is a POTUS signature, and the unborn would be recognized as a person under the 5th and 14th Amendments. Roe vs. Wade would be moot. A pro-life POTUS can also appoint the final justice to the Supreme Court to overturn Roe vs. Wade. I get an eerie feeling you wouldn't like these candidates because they are solid Christians. I am wondering if you wouldn't vote liberal, and allow abortion to continue to save the country from us "evil" Christians.
Sex ed is affected by national elections because the POTUS and Congress decide whether to promote abstinence or focus on birth control. Bush has also funded faith based organizations to teach sex ed which a liberal POTUS would not. I believe abortion is the most tragic thing of our time. There are 4,000 children killed every single day. I believe they are people as you and me, and I will vote for the candidate that says they deserve protections. So far, I see various GOP runners, but the best is Duncan Hunter.
I do disagree with some of your positions, and I question how sincere you are if you vote for a candidate like Hillary who is a firm supporter of legalized abortion, who intends on overturning the Mexico City policy, who intends on promoting and funding groups that support abortion around the world, and who supports ESCR. She would appoint a pro-abort justice, and abortion would continue for years. Secondly, I think you ought to read a Catholic Catechism before you call my faith "unreasonable".
I agree that there are good people outside of Christianity, but I believe the goodness they have comes from God, and I agree some Christians don't follow the teachings of their Church. I have fully thought things through, and there is no where I would rather be than the Catholic Church. I believe it is the bride of Christ and his representative on Earth. Individual members, even clergy, don't always follow the Church's teachings, but that does not mean the teachings are not pure.
The authorities in Jesus' time did not impress him because they did not practice what they preached, they were too legalistic (meaning concerned about all the rituals in the OT), and they often acted above and showed little concern for their people.
You have not shaken my faith, for I am firm in it. I understand your views quite well, and I think it is a great ill to teach 5 year olds sex ed, encourage birth control, have kids play with condoms, teach foreplay, teach lubricants, teach homosexual sex and positions, etc. I believe this is not healthy for children, and we will have to agree to disagree I guess.
You have no clue what truths or untruths a parent is teaching a child unless you are able to be in each home. If "society" steps in, it will be you secular humanist types which I do not want teaching my kids. The only way for the children to be taught what you consider the truth would be for the state to carefully monitor each household or raise the kids themselves. Perhaps you like that idea, but I see it as an infringement on freedom. I agree children need to know about pedophiles. All they have to be told is that people should not be touching their private areas, or the area shielded by their underwear. Parents can give term names if they wish.
You then go after my signature, but it is staying because I agree with it. I said earlier in this thread that we had made our positions clear, and I saw no need to continue with the discussion. I got sucked back in because I saw you on here continuing to promote sex ed for five year olds. You may write a rebuttal, but I will not be responding, as I see this discussion is useless. We will have to agree to disagree.
By the way, FM, I agree with most of your post to Coco.

reply from: faithman

And if I disapprove of the religious views of Christians being shoved down my kids' throats by well meaning Christians, I can just "suck it up," because it's their duty to spread "the truth?" Sorry, ma'am. It takes a village to raise a child, and I'm part of the village too. You take whatever legal measures you feel are appropriate in the best interest of our children, and I'll do the same. You don't necessarily have the authority to demand I abstain from teaching anyone anything. If sex ed is made mandatory in public schools, you'll just have to either "suck it up" or find an alternative. Personally, I'm all for it, and my votes will reflect that position.
Yas you are the village idiot. We did just fine before the know it all secular humanist hi jacked the school system. Every parent has the right to teach their children at home and by pass the secular humanist brain washing at the "village" school house. And I find it revealing that you use the language of the pro-abort witch running for president. It does not take a village to raise children, it takes a man and a woman in a life time commitment, to do the best they can to provide. My father never handed lolipops to children at the park, but he did give straight answers to me when I asked him.

reply from: Wrench

More and more I'm happy to have made the choice to home-school my children.

reply from: coco

FMAN IGNORENCE MUST BE BLISS!! YOU ARE BEYOND IGNORANT!!

reply from: AshMarie88

That's certainly your prerogative. I'm simply concerned about the parents who will not properly and completely educate their children. Not all parents are willing, able, and qualified, which is why we needed public schools to start with. I think home schooling should be done when it is in the best interest of the child, but not simply to avoid any aspect of the child's education.
If any outside schools should exist, it's private schools that should be, not public schools. There are countless numbers of problems with public schools, haven't you noticed? Public schools are why so many kids are failing in life.
Homeschooling is FAR better than public schooling.
Public schooling is just... wrong. In so many ways.

reply from: GodsLaw2Live

That's certainly your prerogative. I'm simply concerned about the parents who will not properly and completely educate their children. Not all parents are willing, able, and qualified, which is why we needed public schools to start with. I think home schooling should be done when it is in the best interest of the child, but not simply to avoid any aspect of the child's education.
If any outside schools should exist, it's private schools that should be, not public schools. There are countless numbers of problems with public schools, haven't you noticed? Public schools are why so many kids are failing in life.
Homeschooling is FAR better than public schooling.
Public schooling is just... wrong. In so many ways.
My 15 year old was shown a very inappropriate movie called Mean Girls by the school counselor. The movie involved vulgar inappropriate sexual material. A mother enters her daughter's bedroom and asks her daughter if she wants condoms while making out with the boy in her room. In another scene, mom offers alcohol to teenagers so they can safely drink at her home rather than elsewhere. A school teacher pulls her blouse off in front of her class of students. The principal has a wrist problem because he doesn't have a girlfriend; etc., etc. The star of the movie is Lindsay Lohan, a lost and confused soul who in real life has been arrested for DUI, cocaine, car crashes and running over a pedestrain's foot with a motor vehicle. She was also stalking and menacing other human beings. I complained about the school requiring my dauther to view such material. The principal said it was appropriate material, he approved it, and he stands by the counselor. I've only recently convinced my wife not to home school. She has been upset by the school's attitude all summer long. The principal, counselor, and maybe some teachers seem confused about proper ethics and the teaching of good moral manners to children. My daughter is also concerned about the high incidence of STDs at her school and the almost daily sexual requests and sexual suggestions from boys that have had no proper instructional background. Those degenerates think it's a real kick to make offensive sexual remarks.

reply from: Wrench

I'm just curious why you oppose home schooling? Is it merely a personal choice (finances, familial issues, etc) or is it because of how you, personally, understand home schooling? If the former I can understand, but if the latter, you may want to reconsider - especially if it's something your wife has already expressed an interest in and support for. Obviously I'm in favor of home schooling, and in most instances I think children benefit from much more than they lose through not being in a traditional school setting, and being myself a former homeschooler I think I'm in a pretty good position to give real-life information on what homeschooling is really like, as opposed to the stereotypes surrounding it.

reply from: holopaw

Public school has many benefits. Socialization and student involvement for one. I think home schooling is a bit weird in many aspects. No clubs, no sports, no band, no dances. I think there are benefits, but you miss out on a lot of the fun of growing up.

reply from: Wrench

Actually, there are a ton of home-school groups. I was involved in many different dance groups, acting, home-school band and orchestra, and I was president of the NoVa home-school debate group, which actually competed with local high schools. All my siblings were involved in sports, whether baseball, soccer or karate.
If you look beyond your own perception I'm sure you'll find that 99% of what you think you know about home-schooling is based on stereotype and rumor, rather than established fact. If what you've said about your daughter's high school is true, I don't see why you would be so quick to discredit a valid alternative - especially considering all the numerous studies that have been done on formerly home-schooled adults, showing that the vast majority score higher than the national population on education, and are generally socially well-adjusted adults.

reply from: faithman

The anti home school crowd, usually bort heads as well, use the rare and extreme cases to condemn home schoold all togerther [sound familiar?]. A friend of ours raised 2 sons on home school. One is a captain in the USAF, works in intelegence, and goes to work in a bunker with a 4ft think concrete door. The other son is also USAF, and is in the highly specialize rescue team. His unit has seen duty as a part of Bush's security detail. The public school system ofers "socialzation" with dope dealers, rapist, and maniak killers [ and teachers who molest]. I think the bad public schools far out wieght the bad home schoolers. There is a study that found that home schoolers are also better at relating to people of all age groups. There is no lack of activities, and with a flexible schedual, home schoolers have an opertunity to experiance things public schoolers never will.

reply from: coco

Taking god out of the schools, I think if you are going to put "him" back in you should not only teach of the christian god but also the muslim, the jewish, the hindu, etc they SHOULD not only make avalibilty on to the christian ideas but expose ALL religions of the world.
Yes CP I know to christian conservitves refer to "secular huminist" as satins spawns, but I dont care what those people call me, I CARE ABOUT ALL PEOPLE not just christians! Their moral darwinsim appauls me!!

reply from: GodsLaw2Live

I'm just curious why you oppose home schooling? Is it merely a personal choice (finances, familial issues, etc) or is it because of how you, personally, understand home schooling? If the former I can understand, but if the latter, you may want to reconsider - especially if it's something your wife has already expressed an interest in and support for. Obviously I'm in favor of home schooling, and in most instances I think children benefit from much more than they lose through not being in a traditional school setting, and being myself a former homeschooler I think I'm in a pretty good position to give real-life information on what homeschooling is really like, as opposed to the stereotypes surrounding it.
I'm for homeschooling myself. I've passed various tests for licensing and certifications by studying at home. Also, we are going to home school our 5 year old this year, but the two older children will go back to public school. Concerns I have are financial, adequate time, and questions as to whether a disciplined agenda will be adhered too. Very good course materials are available from Beka Books. Used materials can be purchased annually at a nearby city during the Home Schoolers convention. There are professionals putting together high quality curriculums. Being able to follow through and execute is a question.

reply from: Wrench

Oddly enough, the vast majority of home schoolers do go on to join the military - even though most branches of the military do not consider home schooling a valid educational alternative.
For instance, I am seeing joining the Air Force, yet the Air Force requires that home schoolers without college experience must score at least 69 on the ASVAB. Granted, that's not difficult, but those with public school diplomas don't have the same regulations - even though, as I said, many independent studies have shown that home schooled children generally receive a superior education.
That's really the only thing I would ever tell a parent considering home schooling. The only draw-back I've ever experienced is with the way that the world views home schooling, and generally punishes us for having been schooled differently. I had to jump through a lot of hoops just to be accepted into college, even though I scored high on all my entrance exams except math. I couldn't get any scholarships without a high school GPA, even though I was involved in many activities, so I paid for the majority of college out-of-pocket. But, all things considered, I think it ended up working out for the best for me. I wouldn't have wanted things to go any other way; I love being a former home-schooler, and the opportunities it affords me to try to break down the stereotypes that many home schoolers face. Maybe my experience will make things better for future home schoolers.
For those with young kids, the best way to work it is to home school through 10th grade, and private or public school for the last 2 years. Chances are they'll already be advanced on their peers, and can spend the majority of their time earning scholarships and establishing a GPA. It's the only way to beat the system that I've found.

reply from: coco

F MAN if you wnat the bible to be preached in school so bad why dont you try following on of the MOST important ones "THOU SHALL NOT KILL" fman condoning the murder of ANYONE is like killing them yourselves!! You talk about "KILLER MOMS" this and that but what about you?? You are just as guilty as the KILLER MOMS, you are condoning people to kill the abortionists and in my, and MANY others book a kill is a kill!!

reply from: yoda

So, coco, when are you going to start giving the baby killers the same attacks that you give FMan? Why are you so quiet about them?

reply from: faithman

Well lets straighten out the mis information in your post, shall we? Number one, the Bible does not proclaim a total moritorium on killing. The actual translation of the scripture you quoted from the original language is, thou shall do no murder. Murder is the shedding of inocent blood. The bible prescibes homocide for several reasons. One of them being to protect inocent lives. It doesn't suprise me that one as stupid, and ignorant as your self would get this wrong. And you will probly choose to remain ignorant. Is it justifiable to shoot and kill some one who is about to kill a class room full of kindergarden kids? Even someone as stupid as you would agree that this is justifiable. If it is right to stop the killer of born children with deadly force, then it is most assuredly justifiable to put down those hell bent on killing the womb child. Of course I realize in your secular humanist brain washing, that logic was also scrubbed out, but do try and keep up dear, this point has been raised and explained several times on this forum.

reply from: faithman

The religions you number are already allowed in the schools. The only name that may not be spoken by those of faith, is JESUS CHRIST! Moral darwinism belongs to secular humanist, not christians. Morality did not evolve, but was dictated to man by God. Moral darwinism of secular humanism appauls me as well.

reply from: Wrench

... Is it any wonder WHY I believe so strongly that religion should excuse itself from the abortion debate? What gets accomplished, other than the puffing up of ones' own ego, when religion reigns supreme over the ultimate goal of making abortion a non-option? You should both be ashamed. If you think the other side achieved political and social power by attacking each other and promoting disunity, you've got another thing coming.


2017 ~ LifeDiscussions.org ~ Discussions on Life, Abortion, and the Surrounding Politics