The Real Abortin Debate

Written by Sheldon Reiffenstein


Continued from page 1

Making abortion illegal will create murkiness, indecision and more deaths, without loweringrepparttar number of, much less stopping, abortions.

The argument about when life begins is a huge distraction inrepparttar 114865 abortion debate. The defendants love to trap pro-choice people by getting them to either agree that life begins at conception, or get them squirming in their chairs trying to avoidrepparttar 114866 question. Too many pro-choice people fall for it and they can’t win. We’ve shown that in any abortion law anti-abortion groups will need to make concessions that compromise their overriding principle that all life is sacred. The real discussion cannot be about when any of us believes life starts. It must be aboutrepparttar 114867 circumstances that make abortion necessary.

Why not take a new, liberal view ofrepparttar 114868 debate? Why won’trepparttar 114869 defendants take their heads out ofrepparttar 114870 Bible, and facerepparttar 114871 truth? Unmarried people will not stop having sex even with allrepparttar 114872 finger-wagging and righteousness ofrepparttar 114873 defendants. Given that, why not teach proper sexuality education? Why not make available any and all contraceptive devices that would stop pregnancy from happening inrepparttar 114874 first place? Why not let women be in charge of how they handle their reproductive years? Why not do all this and create a situation where abortion is less necessary? Abortion will never be eliminated. The defendants themselves say they know that in certain circumstances an abortion isrepparttar 114875 only medical solution. Once again, they can practice this moral relativism, while atrepparttar 114876 same time inciting abortion foes and painting liberals as “baby killers”. Their tactics suck and we need to call them on it. Rational people are going to disagree in this debate. What we should strive for is an agreement to reducerepparttar 114877 necessity for abortions. Reason versus irrationality has to prevail.



Sheldon Reiffenstein is a freelance writer and a studen tof government, with a Political Science degree. His latest book is titled "Liberal Is NOT A Four Letter Word, available at www.liberalisnotafourletterword.com/


Gastro-physics and dietary anti-matter

Written by Will Clower, Ph.D.


Continued from page 1
Oreos and skim milk cancel perfectly. M&Ms are vaporized intorepparttar next astral plane when thrown into a trail mix bag with a few Spanish peanuts. And then there’s diet drinks …repparttar 114864 perfect dietary anti-matter for any form of plasticized fruit rollup, gummy worms, or even weight loss candy bars. Sorry forrepparttar 114865 dive intorepparttar 114866 messy scientific details, but there’s just a bit more you should know about this physics phenomenon. The calorie cancellation must happen within a certain time frame, if you are serious about blipping away that ingot of taffy you just ate. It’s like your mother explained, logically, that swimming after quick a baloney and cheese sandwich atrepparttar 114867 beach will make you drop like a rock torepparttar 114868 bottom ofrepparttar 114869 ocean, unless you waitrepparttar 114870 required 30 minutes or so. In justrepparttar 114871 same way, modern gastro-physicists indicate that full cancellation can only take effect ifrepparttar 114872 diet product smashes intorepparttar 114873 junk food within 7.45 minutes. These guys are brilliant. Sorepparttar 114874 next time you see cleverly disguised gastro-physicists chasing their Snickers with a Diet Coke, don’t harrumph. They’re not as daft as they seem.



Dr. Will Clower is the award-winning author of The Fat Fallacy and founder of The PATH Curriculum, The PATH Online, and Newsletter. The PATH: America’s weight solution. Dr. Clower can be reached on his website www.fatfallacy.com.


    <Back to Page 1
 
ImproveHomeLife.com © 2005
Terms of Use