anonemouse

No, the adult thing would be to not read a thread that you don't want to read. Or, the adult thing would be to go to your control panel and remove the Rants and Raves forum from the New Posts page. You can do that, you know. You don't want to look at RnR threads? You don't have to. I'm sorry that you think that I'm not an adult about things. I just get very sick of people not taking responsibility for their own actions. I don't "attack" until I've been attacked. To me, it's childish to blame other people for "forcing" you to read a thread. Unless someone is standing over you with a whip, don't talk to me about being "forced" to read a thread on the internet. Your curiosity got the best of you? Fine, then admit that. Just stop blaming other people. No one here "forces" anyone to read anything that they don't choose to read.

No, not in my opinion. Until it has a greater chance of being able to live than dying once it is removed from its mother's womb, it isn't an individual. Until that point, the woman carrying it has greater value than a fetus that would die if removed.

Really? What about the woman that aborts her severely deformed fetus that would be forced to live in abject pain for the rest of its very short life, if born? I think an abortion is compassionate in that instance, don't you? What about the woman who aborts her fetus because she had to decide whether she died or her fetus died? May not be compassionate for the fetus, but it is compassionate for her.

Don't worry, it didn't. Your attempt may have been an emotional attack, but I just found it to be pitiful. And again, the attempt at an emotional attack/appeal. Come up with something better, please. Obviously, they are living, breathing indivisuals with a self-sustaining heartbeat. Therefore, they are not comparable to a fetus.

And that still invalidates your argument. Obviously, the courts thought he had the right to make that decision. And after all, they are the ones who determine it.

True, but at least they aren't the giant, obnoxious, technicolor ads that OH has. The ones we have right now are easily ignored. No one is forcing anyone to use "New Posts." And again, people have the ability to choose whether or not they actually want to read something. I won't feel sorry for people that let their curiosity get the better of them. "Pushing it on people?" Are you serious? "Pushing it on people" would be requiring them to read every post they see. "Pushing it on people" would be requiring them to respond to every post they see. Last time I looks, I don't control what everyone else does. I'm sick and tired of the, "Poor me, those crazy liberals made me click on that thread, read it, and respond to it. I'm SO weak-willed that I can't decide whether or not I want to read a post, I have to let others do it for me." crap. Why can't people just grow the hell up and take responsibility for their actions instead of blaming it on everyone around them? To be honest, that says more about YOU than the people you talk to in RnR. The mature people around here know that you can disagree with someone and still support them. Heck, look at the fight I had with WasaBubble in the smoking thread. We fought like hell in there, but we're still friends and we still support each other on the rest of the board. As MANY people in RnR have shown, that is part of life. Just because YOU are incapable of it doesn't mean everyone else it. And again, there's that "force" word. Take responsibility for your own actions, for Pete's sake. You are an adult. No one "forces" you to do anything.

Come on, surely you can do better than that. You're just resorting to emotional attacks because you are lacking a better argument. The difference between what I said and what you just said is that drug-addicts can actually make their wishes known. And, they are actually living, breathing individuals with a self-sustaining heart beat.

Yes, actually, he does. Remember the Schiavo case? As much as her parents protested that she would never have wanted to be removed from life support, he still had the right to do it. And the courts upheld that right. Once you marry someone, your parents or other loved ones lose all right to make legal and medical decisions for you. Unless they can present legal documents that prove that you didn't suddenly change your mind after talking to them or writing a letter to them, he has the right to remove your life support.

Well, hell. I wrote out a reply and LBT lost it. I'll try to remember what I said. A fetus does not know "bad" from "good". I would argue that society should be more concerned with the people already here who are begging for help and going unheard. You know, the thousands of kids in foster care, the millions of homeless, the millions of drug-addicts who want help. Even the thousands of innocent civilians in danger of being killed by our government's bombs.

Well, yeah, we kinda do. Like I said in the other abortion post, if you are put on life support and haven't made any advance directives, your husband has the right to remove that life support. It doesn't matter if he is doing it because he doesn't want you to suffer, or because he thinks that you would be an inconvenience to him, he has that right.

Well, for other parents, their children don't push farther, either. Their children know and understand the method that they use. And they've been able to achieve that without inflicting pain. But you still haven't answered my question. Your children could just as easily disregard your "one or two stinging blows" and do whatever they wanted to. What would you do then, since it would be obvious that they weren't responding to the "spanker?" Would you beat them up, leave them with welts and bruises, since "stinging" wasn't doing any good? You may get mad at that question, but it is sincere. At least the other parents have another level that they can go to, if need be. You don't. There isn't any higher level that you can go to without becoming a child abuser.

That's true, and I said that in the one of my other posts. But the fact remains, unless you have made your wished clear (legally clear, that is), your husband has the right to kill you if you are on life support. At that point, you do not have "a right to live." Do you realize how...well, stupid, for lack of a better term, that statement is? Once we can come up with the technology a la "Babytalk," to listen to an unborn fetus, we can change the law. But right now, a fetus doesn't HAVE a voice to be heard.

And MY point is that you can't poll everyone that is active on the board. There are always going to be people that don't go and vote. It is never truly "controlled." The poll was there, and everyone had the opportunity to vote. I don't see why it shouldn't be. Everyone that comes to this site is an adult, whether or not they act like it. They have the intrinsic ability to make decisions about whether or not they want to click on a thread, whether or not they want to read a thread once they've clicked on it, and whether or not they want to reply to a thread. No one forces anyone to click, read, or reply. If people don't want to even look at RnR thread titles, they can go into their control panels and change the setting that determines whether or not that forum shows in "New Posts." Heck, I still think that all new members should be required to read a message that tells them about the board and its forums, about the rules of the board, and about the ability to control the different settings, and be required to acknowledge (by at least clicking a box) that they've read it before they can begin posting. If they decide to click on the box saying "I have read the preceding message and I understand" without actually reading it, that's their business. At least they wouldn't be able to say that they didn't know what RnR was or that they didn't know how to change certain settings (if they didn't want to be exposed to certain types of threads).

But Gadgetlady, that's true of your method, also. You've never had to go more extreme, but neither have the others who spank without the intent of pain. What would YOU do if your children disregarded your "spanking?" Is YOUR message that you are bigger and stronger and if they get out of line, that you'll do worse with your "spanker?"

Not really. If you are on life support, your husband has the right to have it removed. Technically, you are still living, and he then has the right to kill you. There may still be a chance that you could live, but he still has that right. It is the same with a fetus, just removing its life support. More violently, admittedly, but that's how I view it. Until it has the ability to make its heart beat on its own or has the ability to draw in a breath of air, it doesn't have the same rights as the other members of the human race.

The poll wasn't IN Rants and Raves, though. Everyone had the opportunity to go and vote. If they didn't bother, well, that's their fault. The mods can't just keep making polls because some people didn't bother to vote. They'd be never-ending.

The fetus wasn't 5 months. Their RELATIONSHIP was 5 months old. They've only known each other since January. His girldfriend was less than 8 weeks pregnant. I think I have a right to be a little pissed off that my brother is rushing into marriage with someone that he doesn't know very well, just because she got knocked up. After all, I know his track record with his girlfriends.

Gadgetlady, you may believe that, but that isn't the way things are. It has been proven time and time again that all humans don't have the same rights. Would it be wonderful if everyone had the same rights? Of course, but the fact is, we limit the rights of people, depending on their intelligence, their age, and their level of cognition all the time. Do we allow mentally handicapped people to sign legal papers that they don't understand? No. Is a will legally binding if the person signing it wasn't mentally competent? No. Are family members allowed to remove their loved ones from life support if their family member had not signed any legal papers to the contrary? Yes. Do high school students have the right to free speech or the right to privacy? Not necessarily. Do we remove civil rights from people that we think are "terrorists," even if they are US citizens? You better bet we do. Not all people have equal rights.

Well, it's looking like a lot of the stuff is going to fall in the same week. My family is wanting to have the vacation/reunion thingy in last week of June, my surgeon consult got rescheduled for June 27th, and my brother and his fiance decided to get married on June 29th. So maybe I'll be able to just take that entire week off.

Congrats, Alexandra! I know you wanted this badly!

Or, like my roommate did, marry at leisure and repent in haste. She was with the guy for four years before they got married, and they were separated within 6 months and oficially divorced the day before the first anniversary.

My brother needs to make up his damned mind. He asked his girlfriend of less than 5 months to marry him when they found out she was pregnant. She had a miscarriage last week. They had originally decided to get married in late June or early July. Even though there isn't any rush anymore, they decided to still get married around that time. After going back and forth several times, they decided to set a date for June 29th. I am hoping this is the final date. They aren't 100% sure of the location, though. They are probably going to be having a civil ceremony in Nashville, although my brother tried to talk my mom into everyone flying to Hawaii and doing it there. Yeah, right. Maybe he has a couple thousand dollars to spend for a few days, but the rest of us don't. I am just getting really irritated with the whole thing. If they were smart, they would put off getting married for a few months and plan the damned thing properly, instead of trying to rush it and stressing everyone else out.

Personally, I hope that LBT doesn't get the same sort of obnoxious advertising that OH has. To be honest, I think they really kind of take advantage of the members. All those ads for plastic surgery centers, jumbo-capacity toilets, and BO-reducing tablets are no better than the ads on TV or in magazines for the next fad diet.

Bypass patients don't lose 90% of their weight. After two years, the amount of excess weight lost with the bypass is statistically the same as the amount of excess weight lost with the band. As time goes on, RNY bypass patients start gradually regaining the weight that they've lost, while lap-band patients keep losing weight. I think you need to find a new surgeon. His "facts" about European banding are bull. It seems to me that he is either wanting to perform RNY because of the greater expense to you, or he is not experienced with banding. Either way, RUN.

Just think, he created his own legacy. He'll forever be known as "that guy who protested against the teletubby" and "the guy who blamed 9/11 on the gays, liberals, and pro-lifers." Here's a CNN article on him: