Celivia,
Education can be used to help control a risk, although education is not normally very reliable. Eg. People have been educated not to smoke, but they still do, and the rates of smoking are actually increasing in some sections of society.

Education is normally mid-range in usefulness when controlling a risk, and ultimately there has to be something more reliable, more tangible and more foolproof than education to control a risk.

The enormous amount of money spent on a war in Iraq could have been spent on developing alternative forms of fuel, and countries wouldn’t need Iraq.

The enormous amount of money spent on abortion clinics could have been spent on developing better forms of contraception, and people wouldn’t need abortion clinics.

Abortion clinics have been around for many decades, but have done minimal towards reducing the abortion rate, and the feminist insistence on abortion means that there will be less likelihood that better forms of contraception will ever be developed, for both men and women.

Lititia,
Your whole argument and attitude is not based on science, or even risk management, and yet you believe that children should receive so called “sex education”.

What concerns me, is what will they be taught in this so called “sex education”.

If you are anything to go by, they will not be taught facts, statistics, or science, but will be taught to like abortion (or else).

Why does everyone disagree? Would those that stand for abortion, happily be the ones to throw those babies in the trash can? I know just that thought, and those precious gorgeous ones being torn apart makes me weep. I read on another site one pro-abortionist say "Those in the religious right can cry themselves to sleep - I don't care." I would rather be one who weeps for them, then one who is angry trying to protect that "right" to harm the unborn and their mother. Yes, you do know, even if it's buried far beneath, that abortion is wrong. How can someone be arrested for killing their baby, and everyone is disgraced, yet not blink an eyelid when a baby is harmed legally, when it could have survived? It is just sad. So sad. We know better than that. It is in every one of us. I do not hate any one of you, I just want to save those babies. Some one gave you all a chance to live, why can't we give them the same?

People only exist as workers or consumers for industry.

The number of births/abortions should therefore be determined by economic conditions only.

One should therefore require a permit from a business council to reproduce.

If you get pregnant without a permit, you should be forced to abort.

Any illegally birthed children should be the property of the business council, to sell to the highest bidder.

Stuart Walker,
Your scenario may be just around the corner.

If abortion is completely liberalised, then the unborn have no rights. From there it is an easy step to say that parents have no rights, and already fathers have no rights but responsibilities only.

God or ethics don’t exist of course, so a further step is to say that babies should be born to meet demand as consumers and workforce fodder.

Because few statistics are being kept, the dumbed down public will not know what is occurring, and a university academic would automatically get the sack if they said that they were not feminist and didn’t like abortion.

And if someone questions it, then they should be told that they are a part of the “religious right”, they are “misogynist”, and its “none of their business”.

Stuart,
I don’t know what’s funnier, your post or HRS taking the bait.

Iwonder
Such emotive language.
I could, if I wanted to, ask if anti-choicers would happily see even more unwanted children live in abusive, poverty-stricken or neglecting environments.
But I won’t, because I think that the anti-choicers don’t like child abuse and neglect, either, just like pro-choicers are not ‘happy’ about abortion.
Each group has different priorities and values.
Pro-choicers value personal freedom and choice more than the anti-choicers do, while anti-choicers value the life of embryos more than freedom of women and don’t find it as problematic if women lose their freedom over their own body.
You also confuse embryos/fetuses with babies.
No ‘baby’ has ever been aborted- embryos/fetuses are. Unborn babies don’t exist; they are not babies/persons until they’ve been born.
Before about the 26th week of gestation, the foetus has no developed human brain. It’s impossible without a complete nervous system to have consciousness of anything.
There is a limit in (almost) all countries that have legalised abortion, a limit that is well before the brain is developed.

HRS,
“… there has to be something more reliable, more tangible and more foolproof than education to control a risk.”
Agreed that education is only one, albeit the most important, approach to reduce unwanted pregnancies.
Education only, without easy access to a wide range of contraception would not be a reliable risk reducer.

I think that you don’t see the value of comprehensive sex education as much as I do because you don’t have a proper concept of what is being taught, while I have experienced it.
Even though sex education has changed since I went to school, I can tell you that this education is far beyond just ‘lessons’ like we see with anti-smoking etc and are far more effective.
It involves years, throughout the last year of primary school and all of the High school years, of regular, very explicit and realistic education.
Gory details about everything from diseases to abortion to birth.

Celivia,
It doesn’t take long before the real truth comes out.

So now you want “gory details” in this so called sex education, and it should begin in primary school.

I supposed if someone didn’t want to watch it or hear about it they would receive a Fail mark.

This so called sex education is sounding more suspect in time.