Posted on 10/30/2006 5:46:15 AM PST by paltz
"oy. It's a no win situation, huh?"
If he's tenured...it's a real mess.
Administrators have to get creative - and they often find themselves in "no win" situations...yes.
"LOL. Actually, I'd like to see the schools cleaned out and start over, but I'm not holding out for that"
Everyone would like to see that.
It would require a complete dismantling of the NEA.
Quite a battle.
No. How is that relevant to what I wrote in #127?
Think about it.
So, it wasn't really elective surgery in the sense that nearly all abortions are?
Still not getting it.
That's a stumper, since one has nothing to do with the other.
Granted I have not seen the specific images but if these images are in question then I could easily provide some images that are anything but "alleged."
Liberal school boards know that such images verify one unquestionable fact: abortion is the termination of a reconizable human child at almost every stage of gestation. These images, when seen, leave a clear understanding of the reality of abortion and therefore cannot be allowed to be shown. But guess what - you can't stop the truth to be seen on the net.
wagglebee, I have no problem with EDUCATING our children about abortion or anything else. That isn't the debate here. The debate is about a teacher who crossed the line and showed something horrendous to children without parental permission. We should oppose that no matter what the subject. We can't betray our basic principles because it serves our ends. I've read your posts for over a year and I know that you would say the teacher should be fired if the agenda of this teacher had been pro-abortion. I would completely concur with you in that case.
I find it quite interesting that you are challenging that women can have a lifetime of guilt over an abortion? I am not a woman? Do women have some kind of built in defense mechanism where killing their fetus (baby) does not impact them? Being a man or woman has nothing to do with it, but it is a common attempt of idiotic women who somehow think they can exclude men from a HUMAN issue.
ping
It's hypocritical for us to be angry about homosexual "tolerance" films being shown to our children, while cheering on the teacher showing this film. The teacher was wrong to do so without the expressed consent of the parents.
But until it's in YOUR body, and all that goes along with that, the answer is no...you can NEVER understand the psychological ramifications of childbirth OR abortion.
But someone can take these teens to have actual abortions and that's OK. We just can't show them what really happens. I wonder if that was more gory than some of the horror movies kids vonuntarily pay to go see?
Ping me when you actually get a straight answer to your question.
How many jocks passed out? I keep hearing that the bigger they are, the harder they fall.
Let me ask you this: do you think it would require parental permission to vividly describe the gruesome process of abortions (especially partial birth) along with the process of disposal? Would that also be R-rated? Would the questioning of abortion policies/Roe vs. Wade be allowed?
I am just trying to figure out if you are against the showing of this film because of concern for the children or because you are pro-choice.
Because my original comment was about requiring women who are having abortions to be told of the potential risks like they are for other ELECTIVE procedures (like breast implants, liposuction, etc.).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.