Log in

View Full Version : Anti-choicer murdered.



Richard Nixon
12th September 2009, 05:01
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/09/11/michigan.shooting/index.html

Police: Shooting suspect offended by anti-abortion material



Story Highlights
NEW: Harlan James Drake, 33, arraigned in shootings
Anti-abortion protester was killed outside Owosso high school
Suspect said he was "involved in another homicide," sheriff says
Business owner found dead at gravel company outside town


updated 4 hours, 53 minutes ago




Next Article in Crime » (http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/09/11/warhol.theft/index.html?iref=nextin)



http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/img/2.0/mosaic/base_skins/baseplate/corner_dg_BL.gif


http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/img/2.0/mosaic/tabs/art_icn.gifhttp://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/img/2.0/mosaic/tabs/art_icn_grayed.gif Read (http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/09/11/michigan.shooting/index.html#cnnSTCText)
http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/img/2.0/mosaic/tabs/video.gifhttp://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/img/2.0/mosaic/tabs/active/video.gif VIDEO (http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/09/11/michigan.shooting/index.html#cnnSTCVideo)


http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/img/2.0/mosaic/base_skins/baseplate/corner_dg_TL.gif
http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/img/2.0/global/story_tools/text_size.gif
http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/img/2.0/global/story_tools/txt_minus.gif http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/img/2.0/global/story_tools/txt_minus_dn_.gif
http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/img/2.0/global/story_tools/txt_plus.gif http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/img/2.0/global/story_tools/txt_plus_dn.gif

(CNN) -- Authorities have charged an Owosso, Michigan, man with two counts of first-degree premeditated murder in the Friday shooting deaths of an anti-abortion activist and another man, a prosecutor's office said.
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/CRIME/09/11/michigan.shooting/art.jim.pouillon.courtesy.jpgActivist Jim Pouillon was shot and killed Friday while protesting outside Owosso High School.


http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/img/2.0/mosaic/base_skins/baseplate/corner_wire_BL.gif


Authorities say the suspect, Harlan James Drake, was offended by anti-abortion material that the activist had displayed across from the school all week.
Drake, 33, is accused of shooting anti-abortion activist Jim Pouillon, 63, and Michael Fuoss, 61, who were killed in separate locations Friday morning, the prosecutor's office in Shiawassee County said.
Authorities also have charged Drake with a felony firearm count and carrying a dangerous weapon with unlawful intent, the prosecutor's office said.
Drake also is suspected of "attempting to locate a third victim without success," the office said.
He was arraigned Friday and is being held without bail, the office said. It was not immediately known whether he had an attorney.
Pouillon, whose anti-abortion activity was well-known in the area, was protesting across the street from Owosso High School about 7:20 a.m. Friday when he was killed by several shots fired from a passing vehicle, Owosso Police Chief Michael Compeau said. http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/img/2.0/mosaic/tabs/video.gif Watch Compeau talk about the incident » (http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/09/11/michigan.shooting/index.html#cnnSTCVideo)
Several people witnessed the shooting, and one was able to provide a license number, he said.
Don't Miss



WDIV: Anti-abortion activist shot, killed near school (http://www.clickondetroit.com/cnn-news/20852524/detail.html)


About an hour later, Owosso police officers found the suspect, Compeau said.
"At the time of his arrest, the suspect made statements that he was involved in another homicide in Shiawassee County the same day," he said.
Sheriff George Braidwood said a call had come to a 911 dispatch center about 8:17 a.m. saying that an employee at Fuoss Gravel, outside Owosso, had discovered the owner, Michael Fuoss, dead. He had been shot several times, Braidwood said.
Authorities believe that Fuoss and the suspect knew each other, Braidwood said.
According to Sara Edwards of the county prosecutor's office, authorities do not believe that Drake knew Pouillon.
Operation Save America, the anti-abortion group of which Pouillon was a member, said in a written statement that he was "well known for his love of Christ and unborn children."
The Owosso school district went into immediate lockdown after the shooting outside of the high school and remained so until the suspect was in custody, Compeau said
http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/img/2.0/content/ads/advertisement.gif





The high school's administration offered parents the option of picking up their children, he said. All after-school activities were canceled, he added.
Owosso, a town of about 15,000 people, is about 25 miles west of Flint, Michigan.
E-mail to a friend (http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/09/11/michigan.shooting/index.html#) http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/img/2.0/mosaic/util/email.gif http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/img/2.0/global/icons/btn_close.gif (javascript:cnnHideOverlay('cnnShareThisStory124') ) Share this on:


Mixx (http://www.mixx.com/submit/story?page_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F2009%2FC RIME%2F09%2F11%2Fmichigan.shooting%2Findex.html&title=Police%3A%20Shooting%20suspect%20offended%20 by%20anti-abortion%20material&description=Authorities%20have%20charged%20an%20Ow osso%2C%20Michigan%2C%20man%20with%20two%20counts% 20of%20first-degree%20premeditated%20murder%20in%20the%20Friday %20shooting%20deaths%20of%20an%20anti-abortion%20activist%20and%20another%20man%2C%20a%2 0prosecutor%27s%20office%20said.&partner=CNN) Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/share.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F2009%2FCRIM E%2F09%2F11%2Fmichigan.shooting%2Findex.html) Twitter (http://cnntweet.appspot.com/articles/http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F2009%2FCRIME%2F09%2F11% 2Fmichigan.shooting%2Findex.html/Police%3A%20Shooting%20suspect%20offended%20by%20a nti-abortion%20material/tweet/) Digg (http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F2009%2FCRIME%2F09%2 F11%2Fmichigan.shooting%2Findex.html&title=Police%3A%20Shooting%20suspect%20offended%20 by%20anti-abortion%20material&bodytext=Authorities%20have%20charged%20an%20Owoss o%2C%20Michigan%2C%20man%20with%20two%20counts%20o f%20first-degree%20premeditated%20murder%20in%20the%20Friday %20shooting%20deaths%20of%20an%20anti-abortion%20activist%20and%20another%20man%2C%20a%2 0prosecutor%27s%20office%20said.) del.icio.us (http://del.icio.us/post?v=4&partner=cnn&noui&jump=close&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F2009%2FCRIME%2F09%2 F11%2Fmichigan.shooting%2Findex.html&title=Police%3A%20Shooting%20suspect%20offended%20 by%20anti-abortion%20materialdelicious) reddit (http://reddit.com/submit?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F2009%2FCRIME %2F09%2F11%2Fmichigan.shooting%2Findex.html&title=Police%3A%20Shooting%20suspect%20offended%20 by%20anti-abortion%20material) MySpace (http://www.myspace.com/Modules/PostTo/Pages/?t=Police%3A%20Shooting%20suspect%20offended%20by% 20anti-abortion%20material&c=Authorities%20have%20charged%20an%20Owosso%2C%20 Michigan%2C%20man%20with%20two%20counts%20of%20fir st-degree%20premeditated%20murder%20in%20the%20Friday %20shooting%20deaths%20of%20an%20anti-abortion%20activist%20and%20another%20man%2C%20a%2 0prosecutor%27s%20office%20said.&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F2009%2FCRIME%2F09%2F1 1%2Fmichigan.shooting%2Findex.html) StumbleUpon (http://www.stumbleupon.com/submit?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F2009%2FCRIME %2F09%2F11%2Fmichigan.shooting%2Findex.html&title=Police%3A%20Shooting%20suspect%20offended%20 by%20anti-abortion%20material)






| Mixx it (http://www.mixx.com/submit/story?page_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F2009%2FC RIME%2F09%2F11%2Fmichigan.shooting%2Findex.html&title=Police%3A%20Shooting%20suspect%20offended%20 by%20anti-abortion%20material&description=Authorities%20have%20charged%20an%20Ow osso%2C%20Michigan%2C%20man%20with%20two%20counts% 20of%20first-degree%20premeditated%20murder%20in%20the%20Friday %20shooting%20deaths%20of%20an%20anti-abortion%20activist%20and%20another%20man%2C%20a%2 0prosecutor%27s%20office%20said.&partner=CNN) | Share (javascript:cnnShowOverlay('cnnShareThisStory124') ;)

CNN's Eden Pontz, Laura Dolan and Jean Shin contributed to this report.
All About Michigan (http://topics.cnn.com/topics/Michigan) •

Oh and I thought it was only the pro-lifers who murdered the Born?

danyboy27
12th September 2009, 05:09
nutjob come in all shape form size and ideology, just like dildos

bcbm
12th September 2009, 05:16
One shooting compared to how many have been made by anti-choice whackos?

Also none of the articles clearly articulate the cause of the shooting. The other man shot wasn't politically motivated and from some articles it sounds like he was more pissed about the picture on the sign.

Schrödinger's Cat
12th September 2009, 09:17
"Hey, look! Another thread where we take the actions of a single person and implicate an entire demographic."

Muzk
12th September 2009, 09:36
The crime is not about legally having guns in America - it's more about WHO they give them to. Everyone. There are always people who lose their mind when their feelings overwhelm the brain...

9
12th September 2009, 09:47
The title of this thread is definitely one of the most obnoxious I've come across.

Richard Nixon
12th September 2009, 15:45
"Hey, look! Another thread where we take the actions of a single person and implicate an entire demographic."

The same can be said obviously about anti-abortion terrorists also.

9
12th September 2009, 16:09
The same can be said obviously about anti-abortion terrorists also.

Nice try. This is like finding an article about some act of anti-white racism and referencing it in an attempt to make the absurd claim that whites and blacks are equally victimized by racism. We don't have armed pro-abortion militias actively training to bomb hospitals, kill physicians, and commit various other acts of terrorism in the name of "abortionism". The same obviously can't be said for the "anti-abortionist" crowd.
Just because you've found one nutter who killed two people, of whom one was an anti-abortionist, (and his alleged motive appears quite tenuous) does not suddenly mean that a new phenomenon of "pro-abortion terrorism" exists - it doesn't. And once again, the same obviously can't be said for "anti-abortion terrorism", which does indeed exist and is not particularly uncommon.

Richard Nixon
12th September 2009, 16:33
Nice try. This is like finding an article about some act of anti-white racism and referencing it in an attempt to make the absurd claim that whites and blacks are equally victimized by racism. We don't have armed pro-abortion militias actively training to bomb hospitals, kill physicians, and commit various other acts of terrorism in the name of "abortionism". The same obviously can't be said for the "anti-abortionist" crowd.
Just because you've found one nutter who killed two people, of whom one was an anti-abortionist, (and his alleged motive appears quite tenuous) does not suddenly mean that a new phenomenon of "pro-abortion terrorism" exists - it doesn't. And once again, the same obviously can't be said for "anti-abortion terrorism", which does indeed exist and is not particularly uncommon.

He was offended by anti-abortion material so he probably murdered the pro-life man because he was pro-life. Also anti-abortion terrorism is not big as you think. It was completely dormant during the Bush administration and only now undergoing a mild revival. Generally it is overexaggerated and most anti-abortion terrorists are not organised bands but nutty loners.

danyboy27
12th September 2009, 16:49
He was offended by anti-abortion material so he probably murdered the pro-life man because he was pro-life. Also anti-abortion terrorism is not big as you think. It was completely dormant during the Bush administration and only now undergoing a mild revival. Generally it is overexaggerated and most anti-abortion terrorists are not organised bands but nutty loners.

it was dormant during the bush administration mainly beccause bush was doing exactly what they wanted; preach abstinence, families, cutting arbortion programs in certain states etc etc.

seriously it made me sick to know the us governement was FUNDING millions of dollars in training folks to learn kids abstinence while cutting the corner for various social programs.

and those assole dare to call themselves capitalists.

Richard Nixon
12th September 2009, 16:50
it was dormant during the bush administration mainly beccause bush was doing exactly what they wanted; preach abstinence, families, cutting arbortion programs in certain states etc etc.

seriously it made me sick to know the us governement was FUNDING millions of dollars in training folks to learn kids abstinence while cutting the corner for various social programs.

and those assole dare to call themselves capitalists.

:confused: Don't get the last bit.

danyboy27
12th September 2009, 17:23
:confused: Don't get the last bit.

beccause it just dosnt get any fucking sense from a capitalist viewpoint to throw money in some stupid abstinance programs, give a formation to the teachers for that asswipe program if you consider it would have been cheaper to hand over condom for free in schools.

Richard Nixon
12th September 2009, 17:30
beccause it just dosnt get any fucking sense from a capitalist viewpoint to throw money in some stupid abstinance programs, give a formation to the teachers for that asswipe program if you consider it would have been cheaper to hand over condom for free in schools.

Not all capitalists are amoral Randians you know.

danyboy27
12th September 2009, 17:38
Not all capitalists are amoral Randians you know.

in what giving condom for free to prevents AIDS and uncontrolled birth is ammoral?

to me, the ammoral thing is to brainwash people into thinking they can live with no sex until marriage, that just freaking wrong.

StalinFanboy
12th September 2009, 19:05
Fucking finally.

danyboy27
12th September 2009, 19:07
Fucking finally.

please dont destroy this thread.

if you want to make nixon pissed find something else, i am fucking tired of people destroying OI thread by voluntarly making stupid comment to start a shitstorm.

Jazzratt
12th September 2009, 19:16
The title of this thread is definitely one of the most obnoxious I've come across.

Thankfully I cvan change it. And have done so.

StalinFanboy
12th September 2009, 19:33
please dont destroy this thread.

if you want to make nixon pissed find something else, i am fucking tired of people destroying OI thread by voluntarly making stupid comment to start a shitstorm.
I'm being dead serious. It's about time a few anti-choice people got killed.

Pirate turtle the 11th
12th September 2009, 19:39
I'd be outright deceitful if I said I gave a shit.

danyboy27
12th September 2009, 19:45
I'm being dead serious. It's about time a few anti-choice people got killed.

what is it supposed to actually change?

StalinFanboy
12th September 2009, 20:05
what is it supposed to actually change?
I dunno. Don't really care. I'm just tired of lunatic anti-choicers killing decent people, and nothing happens to them (minus prison time of course).

Orange Juche
12th September 2009, 20:28
I'm being dead serious. It's about time a few anti-choice people got killed.

For being someone who seeks to create a world in which oppression is not existent, supporting and even glorifying the murder of someone for their beliefs (even if they are beliefs most of us here strongly disagree with) is hypocritical at best.

Orange Juche
12th September 2009, 20:30
I dunno. Don't really care. I'm just tired of lunatic anti-choicers killing decent people, and nothing happens to them (minus prison time of course).

So you are going to essentially accuse a man of murder for being part of a group which some lunatics have taken an extra, murderous step. You are implicating a man based on a general ideological association. That's a dangerous way of thinking.

StalinFanboy
12th September 2009, 22:55
For being someone who seeks to create a world in which oppression is not existent, supporting and even glorifying the murder of someone for their beliefs (even if they are beliefs most of us here strongly disagree with) is hypocritical at best.
Alright. I don't think all beliefs deserve respect. I don't care about dead anti-choicers because they are counter-revolutionary, and anti-woman.

Richard Nixon
12th September 2009, 23:28
I dunno. Don't really care. I'm just tired of lunatic anti-choicers killing decent people, and nothing happens to them (minus prison time of course).

Death Penalty. We have it in the US. Are you British or something?


Alright. I don't think all beliefs deserve respect. I don't care about dead anti-choicers because they are counter-revolutionary, and anti-woman.

Counter-Revolutionary? A lot of communist states banned abortion most notably Stalin's USSR and several leftist members here are pro-life most notably RGacky3.

Anti-Woman? A lot of women are pro-life and not just religious fundamentalist housewives either. Ever heard of Feminists for Life? Or Susan B Anthony who was pro-life.

You are a very amoral man quite frankly.

danyboy27
13th September 2009, 00:29
alright screw this

dinosaur game!

http://raisah.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/raptorjesus.jpg

StalinFanboy
13th September 2009, 01:33
Counter-Revolutionary? A lot of communist states banned abortion most notably Stalin's USSR and several leftist members here are pro-life most notably RGacky3. LOL. What a disgusting misunderstanding of my politics. The USSR was NOT communist (over your head though, apparently). An anti-choice stance is counter-revolutionary. It doesn't matter if any so called communists are anti-choice.


Anti-Woman? A lot of women are pro-life and not just religious fundamentalist housewives either. Ever heard of Feminists for Life? Or Susan B Anthony who was pro-life. Women can be anti-woman. Taking a stance on something limits the rights of women is anti-woman.


You are a very amoral man quite frankly.
Cool story bro. You should tell it at a party sometime.

Orange Juche
13th September 2009, 01:41
Alright. I don't think all beliefs deserve respect. I don't care about dead anti-choicers because they are counter-revolutionary, and anti-woman.

Views on respecting beliefs and saying "I'm just tired of lunatic anti-choicers killing decent people, and nothing happens to them" (implying that they deserve to be killed) are vastly different.

I don't respect their beliefs, but having something "happen to them" as a result of an opinion, I find, is extremely oppressive. It is contrary to the most fundamental ideals of anarchism. Someone being killed for believing something is oppressing them, and I can't fathom oppressing someone being anything but contrary to the ideals of someone who wants to end oppression.

Orange Juche
13th September 2009, 01:55
they are counter-revolutionary, and anti-woman.

I think this is a rather oversimplified analysis of people with an anti-choice view. Before I continue, I would first like to establish that I am very much pro-choice, and that it obviously goes hand in hand with women's rights. I do not sympathize with "pro-life" ideology.

BUT... I think it is a broad generalization to accuse all anti-choice people of being both counter-revolutionary, and anti-woman. It comes from the fact that their most basic paradigm is completely different than that of those who are pro-choice.

In some of their views, abortion is "killing" millions of women. They may respect women and women's rights in every other facet other than this issue, and if their basic view establishes that this is truly "murder," being against this perceived "murder" isn't inherently anti-woman. There are plenty of misogynists and chauvanists who are anti-choice, but being anti-choice doesn't inherently make them anti-woman, if their paradigm is that abortion is truly murder. Things aren't so simple as to make such a basic analysis.

The same with counter-revolutionary. I've rarely encountered anti-choicers who are of a revolutionary left persuasion. But I have. And they are staunchly for women's rights in non-abortion related areas. But, they truly see abortion as murder, and therefore, are against it. It has nothing inherently to do with being anti-woman, it's based on one's perception of murder.

This is one problem I notice from people that are rev-left (of course, under all political persuasions as well, but seemingly moreso on the left). Way too many blanket-statements, over simplifications, and incredibly black and white statements. The world, especially sociological issues, are incredibly complicated. Not simple.

9
13th September 2009, 02:45
I think this is a rather oversimplified analysis of people with an anti-choice view. Before I continue, I would first like to establish that I am very much pro-choice, and that it obviously goes hand in hand with women's rights. I do not sympathize with "pro-life" ideology.

BUT... I think it is a broad generalization to accuse all anti-choice people of being both counter-revolutionary, and anti-woman. It comes from the fact that their most basic paradigm is completely different than that of those who are pro-choice.

In some of their views, abortion is "killing" millions of women. They may respect women and women's rights in every other facet other than this issue, and if their basic view establishes that this is truly "murder," being against this perceived "murder" isn't inherently anti-woman. There are plenty of misogynists and chauvanists who are anti-choice, but being anti-choice doesn't inherently make them anti-woman, if their paradigm is that abortion is truly murder. Things aren't so simple as to make such a basic analysis.

But, they truly see abortion as murder, and therefore, are against it. It has nothing inherently to do with being anti-woman, it's based on one's perception of murder.

I don't think you can justifiably reduce women's rights to a matter of subjective perception. The fact that anti-abortionists equate aborting a pregnancy with murder and that some are not driven to this equation by an underlying hatred of women does nothing to change the fact that they are advocating the elimination of a woman's right to bodily autonomy. A worker who opposes unionization because she has genuinely gotten it into her head that worker's unions somehow negate freedom, regardless of being a worker herself and regardless of an absense of hostility toward fellow workers, is nonetheless advocating an anti-worker position. Just as an anti-abortionist, regardless of being a woman herself and regardless of an absense of hostility toward fellow women, is nonetheless advocating an anti-woman position.

Orange Juche
13th September 2009, 03:11
The fact that anti-abortionists equate aborting a pregnancy with murder and that some are not driven to this equation by an underlying hatred of women does nothing to change the fact that they are advocating the elimination of a woman's right to bodily autonomy.

I completely agree, and I do believe their view is anti-woman. But it doesn't inherently make them anti-woman. Ignorant maybe. But not inherently anti-woman, as people.




A worker who opposes unionization because she has genuinely gotten it into her head that worker's unions somehow negate freedom, regardless of being a worker herself and regardless of an absense of hostility toward fellow workers, is nonetheless advocating an anti-worker position.

Agreed, but their view being anti-worker doesn't make them inherently anti-worker. From their view, being against unions might be better for workers, and that's why they are against them (I completely disagree, obviously, but there are misguided people).

RotStern
13th September 2009, 03:22
What assholes. :(

StalinFanboy
13th September 2009, 05:16
Views on respecting beliefs and saying "I'm just tired of lunatic anti-choicers killing decent people, and nothing happens to them" (implying that they deserve to be killed) are vastly different. I'll admit that I said this to get a rise out of people.

StalinFanboy
13th September 2009, 05:26
I think this is a rather oversimplified analysis of people with an anti-choice view. Before I continue, I would first like to establish that I am very much pro-choice, and that it obviously goes hand in hand with women's rights. I do not sympathize with "pro-life" ideology.

BUT... I think it is a broad generalization to accuse all anti-choice people of being both counter-revolutionary, and anti-woman. It comes from the fact that their most basic paradigm is completely different than that of those who are pro-choice.

In some of their views, abortion is "killing" millions of women. They may respect women and women's rights in every other facet other than this issue, and if their basic view establishes that this is truly "murder," being against this perceived "murder" isn't inherently anti-woman. There are plenty of misogynists and chauvanists who are anti-choice, but being anti-choice doesn't inherently make them anti-woman, if their paradigm is that abortion is truly murder. Things aren't so simple as to make such a basic analysis.

The same with counter-revolutionary. I've rarely encountered anti-choicers who are of a revolutionary left persuasion. But I have. And they are staunchly for women's rights in non-abortion related areas. But, they truly see abortion as murder, and therefore, are against it. It has nothing inherently to do with being anti-woman, it's based on one's perception of murder.

This is one problem I notice from people that are rev-left (of course, under all political persuasions as well, but seemingly moreso on the left). Way too many blanket-statements, over simplifications, and incredibly black and white statements. The world, especially sociological issues, are incredibly complicated. Not simple.
Being Anti-choice is always anti-woman and therefore counter-revolutionary. I understand that the reasons why people are anti-choice are varied and complex, but what I am most concerned with is the ends of the anti-choice movement. And no matter the intent of anti-choice people, the end result is that women will be forced to allow an unwanted fetus grow in their bodies, and take nutrients from them. The "pro-life" (anti-choice) movement wants to take a woman's agency over her body away.

If an anti-choicer is concerned that a woman may die if she chooses to have an abortion, and so is against abortion on a public level, then they need to be confronted and that position rejected as paternalistic.

It is for both of these reasons that anti-choice people are restricted on these boards, and should not be considered revolutionary in the world wide Left.

Being pro-choice does not automatically mean you are pro-abortion. It simply means you believe that the choice for a woman to have an abortion should be there. You can be personally against having an abortion and still be a revolutionary. But you cannot be against abortion on a public level, and still be considered revolutionary.

revolution inaction
13th September 2009, 11:37
beccause it just dosnt get any fucking sense from a capitalist viewpoint to throw money in some stupid abstinance programs, give a formation to the teachers for that asswipe program if you consider it would have been cheaper to hand over condom for free in schools.

you assume the objective of the abstinence program is to stop pregnancies and std's, rather than to keep religious nutters happy.

danyboy27
13th September 2009, 14:51
you assume the objective of the abstinence program is to stop pregnancies and std's, rather than to keep religious nutters happy.

seriously someone need to explain me how putting a piece of rubber around my dick goes against religion, this shit will always amaze me.

is there really a place in the bible that say: you shall not jack off.

Richard Nixon
13th September 2009, 22:48
seriously someone need to explain me how putting a piece of rubber around my dick goes against religion, this shit will always amaze me.

is there really a place in the bible that say: you shall not jack off.

Well the Book of Leviticus says that the emission of semen is unclean but then again according to the New Testament, Jesus superseded the Law of Moses and Leviticus.

danyboy27
13th September 2009, 23:18
Well the Book of Leviticus says that the emission of semen is unclean but then again according to the New Testament, Jesus superseded the Law of Moses and Leviticus.


now, i what putting condom machines in school is ammoral then?

Richard Nixon
13th September 2009, 23:25
now, i what putting condom machines in school is ammoral then?

According to the Fundies, yes. As for me I'm unsure.

Rusty Shackleford
13th September 2009, 23:33
The catholic church is against contraceptives, and protestants still follow that sex is generally bad. Christianity frowns on nudity and the human body and believes ones soul is what is to be cared for. so, sex is considered evil (unless for procreation) and masturbation is evil because it is giving into bodily desires. so, these people would rather teach abstinence because then condoms wouldnt be provided, and sex would be further frowned upon by the secular part of society as well.

It serves Catholic and Protestant Christian ideals through public schooling on the general population.

Abstinence teaching does not work alone, if you want to fight teen pregnancy, allow for contraceptives to be handed out, and for better std education and more programs like planned parenthood.
Also, find the root cause of teenage pregnancy. is it tied to underage drinking? partying? lack of education? i dont know, but to provide contraceptives no questions asked would save a lot of babies being born into a horrible environment. im only going to say one thing on abortion. i am pro choice.