quote: OTTAWA - Canada will raise a small flag of independence during George W. Bush's visit this week, when it announces a major funding increase for a United Nations program boycotted by the Bush administration.
While Bush is still in Canada, International Co-operation Minister Aileen Carroll will unveil an almost 40 per cent increase in annual contributions to the U.N. Population Fund. The U.S. has refused to support the fund for the past three years because it contends that the program encourages forced abortions in China. ... According to the program's own estimates, the money the U.S. has withdrawn since 2002 could have helped prevent more than 6 million unwanted pregnancies, 2.4 million abortions, more than 14,000 maternal deaths and more than 200,000 child deaths.
Moreover, the Bush administration has failed to prove any of the allegations against the U.N. Population Fund. A fact-finding mission by its own state department earlier this year actually concluded that the claims about support for abortion in China were groundless.
The state department report of May stated: "Based on what we heard, saw, and read, we find no evidence that UNFPA has knowingly supported or participated in the management of a program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization in the (People's Republic of China). Indeed, UNFPA has registered its strong opposition to such practices."
Note that the US only contributed $34 million per year in the first place while the domestic program that was linked to in the first place cost $900 million over five years.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
We had the kitten killing public service announcement pics posted on the ship during WestPac. Eight months in the Persian Gulf with only one liberty port per month. Needless to say the crew of the good ship Fitzgerald killed many kittens.
-------------------- I'm slightly annoyed at Hobbes' rather rude decision to be much more attractive than me though. That's just rude. - PsyLiam, Oct 27, 2005.
Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged
"Of course abstenence can be taught without resorting to misinformation and fear. Example: 'Condoms. Made like this, work like this, protect against some diseases, have q% failure rate at preventing pregnancy. Birth control pills. Made like this, work like this, protect against NO diseases, minimal failure rate if used correctly, but you damn well better use 'em correctly. X, Y, and Z side effects. Abstinence. Prevents all sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy, always.'"
I think you missed the whole problem. That is how they should be teaching it. Except Bush and Friends think it's evil to even hint that condoms, birth control pills, etc. do anything at all.
See, you explained how to teach abstinence and birth control. Which is in direct contradiction to the administration's insistence upon teaching abstinence and not birth control.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
That explains why he never answers my calls.
Watching CNN tonight they were covering this story and had asked a group of kids (all under 15) how they felt about the program. One of the boys declared that the program "taught him how to be a good man".
That's what's really scary: if this kid's being taught that abstenence equals "being a good man" then what does it say about those with STD's? Gays? Unwed mothers?
Good to know that MY tax dollars are going to this idiocy.
If Bush wants to "privatize" Social Security nad the school system so someone can determine what their retirment money is invested in and where their kids will be educated with tax money, can I PLEASE make sure my money is not supporting some CHristian propoganda for a whole new generation of Neo-Cons?
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Lee: The revelation that Alan has forsworn playing Hide The Sausage shakes me to the core.
Only until I get married, pally.
But that's my point. I was taught abstinance until marriage without threats, without misleading facts, without fear tactics of dying a horrible death or being consigned to eternal flame. My parents taught me by example. Yes, it's tied up with my religious beliefs and moral standards, but there's no threatening involved.
posted
There's a "correct way" to use italics now? ...looks like Aban's not the only one that needs to get laid badly.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
I think you missed the whole problem. That is how they should be teaching it.
Oh, I got that point, I was more responding to the question of whether abstenence could be taught well, which it can. I definitely agree that it's not.
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
What about pre-arranged marriages? Does that mean that you can have sex but it's considered adultery?
Really, having had sex with a couple of partners not only gives you the experience to know what the heck you're doing, but allows you to know that person you're intimate with is someone special- and not just a lifetime's worth of repression influencing your decisions.
Sex is much better when you're in love (though you need a basis for comparison to notice).
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
It's an interesting cultural thing, to be sure. While most of my friends were taught to be careful, use protection, not be slags etc, none of them were told to "save themselves" until they were married. The idea just seems...quaint. I can follow people doing it (or rather, not doing it) for religious reasons, but abstaining from sex due to some sort of "moral belief"? I just can't see how it has anything to do with morality at all.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Well, that's a little like saying that sex itself has nothing to do with morality. Or, rather, that sex doesn't have any privileged moral ground one way or the other. This may be an enlightened point of view, but considering the vast amount of effort people in nearly every society expend on making up and then enforcing proper sexual conduct, I don't quite see how we can say that the existence of such concerns comes as a surprise.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
