The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
heh - i couldn't resist the joke...
anyways - abortion. now that it's widely available, people think it's their safety net. well, what about when they DIDN'T have abortion around, eh? what if einstein was aborted? or more disastrously, Lee Evans!!!
NOOOOOOOOOOOO!
the world needs laughter...and crazy entertainers who make themselves have spasms on stage! hilarious.....
ah well, there's my narrow minded opinion...
anyways - abortion. now that it's widely available, people think it's their safety net. well, what about when they DIDN'T have abortion around, eh? what if einstein was aborted? or more disastrously, Lee Evans!!!
NOOOOOOOOOOOO!
the world needs laughter...and crazy entertainers who make themselves have spasms on stage! hilarious.....
ah well, there's my narrow minded opinion...
Page:
ßora† SagdiyeV wrote:
> this is a daft topic
well, i only made up the topic because i suddenly thought of the ingenius title!
> this is a daft topic
well, i only made up the topic because i suddenly thought of the ingenius title!
Brilliancy wrote:
> I wonder how many abortions there have been in the last hundred years?
> We could be talking about the population of a small country.
Certainly more people have died in wars/accidents and the like. Who's to say what any of the six million Jews killed in WW2 could have done?
> I wonder how many abortions there have been in the last hundred years?
> We could be talking about the population of a small country.
Certainly more people have died in wars/accidents and the like. Who's to say what any of the six million Jews killed in WW2 could have done?
Miserableman wrote:
>
> Certainly more people have died in wars/accidents and the like. Who's
> to say what any of the six million Jews killed in WW2 could have
> done?
Heh. I'd only ever accept that as a valid argument if it were also acknowledged that abortion could have prevented Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Osama bin Laden, Dubya, etc from being born and wreaking the havoc and (to be biblical for a moment) evil that they have done.
Another thing that annoys me is that Pro-Life militants (who are both in the tiny minority, and utterly ruinous to those people who are both Pro-Life and RATIONAL about it) is that they seem to believe Pro-Choice want abortion to be compulsory. I mean, Jesus Christ, I'm not gonna force ANYONE to shove a hoover/razor blade combo up their babychute...
>
> Certainly more people have died in wars/accidents and the like. Who's
> to say what any of the six million Jews killed in WW2 could have
> done?
Heh. I'd only ever accept that as a valid argument if it were also acknowledged that abortion could have prevented Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Osama bin Laden, Dubya, etc from being born and wreaking the havoc and (to be biblical for a moment) evil that they have done.
Another thing that annoys me is that Pro-Life militants (who are both in the tiny minority, and utterly ruinous to those people who are both Pro-Life and RATIONAL about it) is that they seem to believe Pro-Choice want abortion to be compulsory. I mean, Jesus Christ, I'm not gonna force ANYONE to shove a hoover/razor blade combo up their babychute...
Well, it should be said that teenage pregnancy should be frowned upon, rather than encouraged with benefits. But that's another argument...
Bane wrote:
> Well, it should be said that teenage pregnancy should be frowned upon,
> rather than encouraged with benefits. But that's another argument...
...and a poor one (says me). Look at the low rates of teenage pregancy in Iceland, or the Netherlands, where they're a hell of a lot more open about teenage sex.
> Well, it should be said that teenage pregnancy should be frowned upon,
> rather than encouraged with benefits. But that's another argument...
...and a poor one (says me). Look at the low rates of teenage pregancy in Iceland, or the Netherlands, where they're a hell of a lot more open about teenage sex.
I'll just carry on looking at my younger sister for now, spending her child support on chart CDs and fags, while making my family look after her baby since she had it at the age of 16.
She should have been flogged in public, instead she's practically been given licence to ruin everyone's life.
She should have been flogged in public, instead she's practically been given licence to ruin everyone's life.
Thing is, had we worked to the model that the Dutch do concerning avoiding teenage pregnancies, she probably wouldn't have been in that boat in the first place. Instead, we insist on keeping young people ignorant. And in their ignorance, they behave like fools.
Light wrote:
> ...and a poor one (says me). Look at the low rates of teenage
> pregancy in Iceland, or the Netherlands, where they're a hell of a
> lot more open about teenage sex.
I'd say it was a fair one at least.
If you're young couple waiting for housing, how do you jump the list ? Get pregnant. Plus you'll be given a vast pile of benefits and never be homeless again.
I think more needs to be done on getting people to act responsibly when it comes to having children - you've got people on benefits having 2,3,4 or more children, whilst you've got people on a combined 30K income worrying if they can afford to have one because they won't get as much financial help.
I don't think being open is anything to do with it, judging from out teenage pregnancy rates most of them aren't having much trouble in that department.
The Netherlands and Iceland only have low rates because their culture attaches a stigma to teenage mothers which views them unfavourably - which I do believe was the UK situation about 100 years ago. Whilst something needs to be done I don't really think we need to turn social attitudes back 100 years just yet. The other main reason is that contraception is made available freely - strangely it is in the UK as well but we'll ignore that - and I think that the actual point of their low rates is that their sex education classes do not stop teenage sex, they stop teenage pregnancy. In addition Catholics in the UK are highly likely to not wish to have an abortion regardless of age.
If teenage pregnancy in the UK is rising, yet our birth rate is falling, then the increase cannot be ascribed to their being more teenagers in society every year, it means more teenagers are having sex at an earlier age every year.
Why? If sex education has been improved in the UK over the years, alongside rising rates for pregnancy, then to me that suggests it's not working, because the rates are lower the further back in time you go - back to when sex education consisted of one two hour lesson in primary school and one in secondary school.
If sex education worked then we should have seen a drop, but instead it's climbing more and more each year, in relation to improved sex education.
Which kind of suggests being open doesn't work, and nor does the current sex education program, OR other factors are to blame which are not sex education/openess related.
> ...and a poor one (says me). Look at the low rates of teenage
> pregancy in Iceland, or the Netherlands, where they're a hell of a
> lot more open about teenage sex.
I'd say it was a fair one at least.
If you're young couple waiting for housing, how do you jump the list ? Get pregnant. Plus you'll be given a vast pile of benefits and never be homeless again.
I think more needs to be done on getting people to act responsibly when it comes to having children - you've got people on benefits having 2,3,4 or more children, whilst you've got people on a combined 30K income worrying if they can afford to have one because they won't get as much financial help.
I don't think being open is anything to do with it, judging from out teenage pregnancy rates most of them aren't having much trouble in that department.
The Netherlands and Iceland only have low rates because their culture attaches a stigma to teenage mothers which views them unfavourably - which I do believe was the UK situation about 100 years ago. Whilst something needs to be done I don't really think we need to turn social attitudes back 100 years just yet. The other main reason is that contraception is made available freely - strangely it is in the UK as well but we'll ignore that - and I think that the actual point of their low rates is that their sex education classes do not stop teenage sex, they stop teenage pregnancy. In addition Catholics in the UK are highly likely to not wish to have an abortion regardless of age.
If teenage pregnancy in the UK is rising, yet our birth rate is falling, then the increase cannot be ascribed to their being more teenagers in society every year, it means more teenagers are having sex at an earlier age every year.
Why? If sex education has been improved in the UK over the years, alongside rising rates for pregnancy, then to me that suggests it's not working, because the rates are lower the further back in time you go - back to when sex education consisted of one two hour lesson in primary school and one in secondary school.
If sex education worked then we should have seen a drop, but instead it's climbing more and more each year, in relation to improved sex education.
Which kind of suggests being open doesn't work, and nor does the current sex education program, OR other factors are to blame which are not sex education/openess related.
Belldandy wrote:
> Light wrote:
> ...and a poor one (says me). Look at the low rates of teenage
> pregancy in Iceland, or the Netherlands, where they're a hell of a
> lot more open about teenage sex.
>
> I'd say it was a fair one at least.
>
> If you're young couple waiting for housing, how do you jump the list
> ? Get pregnant. Plus you'll be given a vast pile of benefits and
> never be homeless again.
>
> I think more needs to be done on getting people to act responsibly
> when it comes to having children - you've got people on benefits
> having 2,3,4 or more children, whilst you've got people on a combined
> 30K income worrying if they can afford to have one because they won't
> get as much financial help.
>
> I don't think being open is anything to do with it, judging from out
> teenage pregnancy rates most of them aren't having much trouble in
> that department.
>
> The Netherlands and Iceland only have low rates because their culture
> attaches a stigma to teenage mothers which views them unfavourably -
> which I do believe was the UK situation about 100 years ago.
Utter, utter toss. Iceland certainly has no such stigma; I absolutely defy you to even come close to finding one. Sounds very much to me like you're making stuff up as you go along to support an opinion that you've heard from the Tory party conference.
So lets see; every nation in continental Europe has a lower rate of teenage pregnancy...every nation in continental Europe is more open about sex with teenagers than us (yes, even the Spanish and Italians)...yet there is no connection between better sex education, more tolerance and education to teenagers and sex, and lower rates teenaged pregnancies? Well spot the man who didn't get laid when he was a teen.
Teenagers will always have sex. Lots of it. It's in the contract. I'd rather they were well informed and loaded down with contraceptives, than kept dumb and wandering round with shocked looks at the bumb developing in front of them. I don't excuse that minority of young lasses who get pregnant seemingly as a fashion statement, but your approach of 'hang 'em and flog 'em' is what is responsible for the current mess with attitudes to teenage sex in the first place.
Sometimes, even your mix of prudishness and ill-informed ignorance can be astonishing.
> Light wrote:
> ...and a poor one (says me). Look at the low rates of teenage
> pregancy in Iceland, or the Netherlands, where they're a hell of a
> lot more open about teenage sex.
>
> I'd say it was a fair one at least.
>
> If you're young couple waiting for housing, how do you jump the list
> ? Get pregnant. Plus you'll be given a vast pile of benefits and
> never be homeless again.
>
> I think more needs to be done on getting people to act responsibly
> when it comes to having children - you've got people on benefits
> having 2,3,4 or more children, whilst you've got people on a combined
> 30K income worrying if they can afford to have one because they won't
> get as much financial help.
>
> I don't think being open is anything to do with it, judging from out
> teenage pregnancy rates most of them aren't having much trouble in
> that department.
>
> The Netherlands and Iceland only have low rates because their culture
> attaches a stigma to teenage mothers which views them unfavourably -
> which I do believe was the UK situation about 100 years ago.
Utter, utter toss. Iceland certainly has no such stigma; I absolutely defy you to even come close to finding one. Sounds very much to me like you're making stuff up as you go along to support an opinion that you've heard from the Tory party conference.
So lets see; every nation in continental Europe has a lower rate of teenage pregnancy...every nation in continental Europe is more open about sex with teenagers than us (yes, even the Spanish and Italians)...yet there is no connection between better sex education, more tolerance and education to teenagers and sex, and lower rates teenaged pregnancies? Well spot the man who didn't get laid when he was a teen.
Teenagers will always have sex. Lots of it. It's in the contract. I'd rather they were well informed and loaded down with contraceptives, than kept dumb and wandering round with shocked looks at the bumb developing in front of them. I don't excuse that minority of young lasses who get pregnant seemingly as a fashion statement, but your approach of 'hang 'em and flog 'em' is what is responsible for the current mess with attitudes to teenage sex in the first place.
Sometimes, even your mix of prudishness and ill-informed ignorance can be astonishing.
Light wrote:
> Sometimes, even your mix of prudishness and ill-informed ignorance
> can be astonishing.
As is your ability to dismiss valid points as conservative ravings. I say again: If sex education and openeness about the subject leads to lower teen pregnancies, and if such education has improved and become greater year on year, then WTF are we seeing an ever more rapidly rising increase in teen pregnancies year on year instead of a decrease as was seen in Europe ?
Perfectly valid question, but dimissed by you.
> Sometimes, even your mix of prudishness and ill-informed ignorance
> can be astonishing.
As is your ability to dismiss valid points as conservative ravings. I say again: If sex education and openeness about the subject leads to lower teen pregnancies, and if such education has improved and become greater year on year, then WTF are we seeing an ever more rapidly rising increase in teen pregnancies year on year instead of a decrease as was seen in Europe ?
Perfectly valid question, but dimissed by you.
Page: