elfanie

(except that abortions aren't usually performed before 7 weeks gestation because the several reasons...so you're only leaving a 1-week window in which a family would have to A) realize that she's pregnant and B) set up, get money for, and obtain an abortion ) Prove that I did it for cosmetic/convenience reasons. I could say any number of reasons...it would be SO EASY to lie about this. (although you did say this was in your 'ideal world'. *grin* so I doubt if you created your ideal world that people would lie about it..) Like I said...doesn't happen. there's not an instance in which an abortion at 8 months is safer than do a straight delivery without ending the fetal life first. If a health issue was found at 36 weeks gestation...what is the benefit to killing the fetus prior to removing it? But there are two issues you're talking about.. one is morality and moral legislation...which a prolifer would argue is NOT what abortion legislation is about. legislation regarding prostutition...that's a moral law. If we had a law about adultery..that would be a moral law. but laws protecting other individuals from our actions aren't laws of morality.. rape laws aren't laws on morality...it's not illegal because of the morality of rape. It is illegal to protect the person being raped from you. (not you, Bill...but general "you" ) and a prolifer would argue that abortion laws would be to protect someone (baby) from your actions. NO.. NOT the same thing. Assusted suicide is SUICIDE...allowing someone to take their OWN life. It is not under review ANYWHERE whether someone shoudl be able to end your life FOR YOU...which is why Kavorkian didn't administer the medication. he set it up..but the person HAD to be able to administer it themselves. We're not talking suicide here...or allowing someone to end their own life. We're talking about YOU ending it FOR them... and legally there is a big difference.. -------------------------------------------- Elfanie My Skydiving Page Fly Safe - Soft Landings

big big difference between keeping a choice open to people...and removing a choice. If you are prochoice you aren't advocating that they must abort a baby...you're only saying that it should be up to the parents. what you're talking about is mandating abortion..big difference. Unless you're referring to the prolife point of view...in which instance there's also a big difference between forcing an action and preventing one. We can prevent you from doing any number of things (child abuse, molestation, rape, robbery, etc)...but we can't force you to do things... -------------------------------------------- Elfanie My Skydiving Page Fly Safe - Soft Landings

Hee hee.. I've intentionally NOT given my opinion... However, if I was prochoice then I'd say that she should confer with her parents and make a decision that she and her parents feel are best for her in that situation. If I was prolife then I'd say that she shouldn't punish an innocent child because of the sins/crimes of another person and should give birth to the baby and it would be her choice whether to raise the baby or place it for adoption. Depends on if I'm prolife or prochoice. If I'm prochoice then I'd say that the 13 year old who has already been traumatized should do whatever she feels is best and she's been traumatized enough. If I'm prolife then I'd say that because she's been victimized shouldn't give her the right to harm an innocent child...just like if she did give birth to the baby and tried to raise the baby and resented the baby so she abused the baby....her resentment and trauma doesn't give her the right to abuse the baby. If you assume that the thing inside the uterus is NOT a baby, NOT a person...then the response of a prochoicer is very simple to understand and to come to. If you assume the thing inside the uterus is the exact same thing as a born baby....then the response of a prolifer is very simple to understand and to come to. Nope... because in this situation an abortion would be the right choice if the woman's life were endangered...just like murder is justified if you feel that someone is about to end your life. Exactly.. exactly exactly. other than the self-defense exemption...you've hit it exactly right. either the unborn is just like a baby or it isn't...(given any specific stage. There are many people that beleive it's a baby after X stage of gestation and not before...) -------------------------------------------- Elfanie My Skydiving Page Fly Safe - Soft Landings

*nodsnods* Which is exactly what I said previously...which is that if you feel that it is not a "person" yet, then it's understandable that you'd be prochoice. If you feel that it is a "person"...then it's understandable that you'd be prolife. You only came to this conclusion because you are prochoice. if you were prolife..you'd probably have come to the conclusion that I was prochoice. I have not stated my opinion on the subject...just tried to clarify the prochoice/prolife viewpoints... that makes you prochoice, period. Most prochoicers would say that they don't like the idea of abortion..or that ideally it would never be done...and/or that they themselves would never obtain one.. but these things have nothing to do with being prochoice. Prochoice simply means that you beleive that it should remain a legal option for those who WOULD wish to persue that option. Excellent point! However...the counter-argument to that is that 'we' can force proceedures upon certain adults, too....those that the courts have deemed unable to decide for themselves...and that is irrelevant. What abortion is talking about is specifically the right to end their life (if you're prolife)...or specifically the right of a woman to do with her body what she wants to (if you're prochoice..because at that point there is not other "person", there is only the woman) So your point is that you support the idea of slowly attributing rights to individuals based on age... and that the right to protection from death at the hands of another individual is one of those rights? *nods* Fair enough...so at what point of development do you believe that this right of protection should occur? Brain activity? A certain gestational age? Birth? withholding food/water....you don't get brought up on murder charges. Inducing labor and removing the baby...you don't get brought up on murder charges (even if abortion were illegal). taking a gun into the room and shooting the person...THAT would get you brought up on murder charges...even if they are terminally ill or brain dead. THAT is more comperable to abortion in tht there is a direct action taken to intentionally end the life (if you believe that there is a life there). -------------------------------------------- Elfanie My Skydiving Page Fly Safe - Soft Landings

I just had a huge "duh" moment. Yeah yeah yeah.. ok... see..at least I admitted to not being a math fan. (I'm really not as stupid as I just tried to make myself look.) Ok.. so how many seconds? and how much do you add/take away for headwinds..? (and is the airplane always going to set up jumprun into the wind?) -------------------------------------------- Elfanie My Skydiving Page Fly Safe - Soft Landings

that's because there is never ever an instance in which partial birth abortions would be beneficial for the life of the mother. If it's late enough to perform a partial birth abortion..then it's safer on the mother to simply remove the baby without killing it. To perform a partial birth abortion, it is required to do an external version (or rarely they are able to do an internal version) to rotate baby to a footling presentation...deliver all of the baby except the head...remove the contents thus collapsing the head...then complete delivery. to do all of this is more dangerous than birthing a baby in a cephalic presentation. the problem isn't of removing a baby because mom is now being threatened by the pregnancy... the problem is the killing of the baby first before delivery. That is because you're prochoice...so of course you'd feel that way. Like all prochoicers feel. However...to a prolifer, to say that is the exact same thing (to them) as saying, "If we ever have a problem with our 3 month old baby I very much hope that we (and our pediatrician) can decide what to do without government interference. We know better than the government what to do with our children." Actually, brain activity has little to do with viability...because there are babies with little brain activity and yet are viable, and there are babies that dream and smell and hear and have full brain activity that aren't viable yet. If you remove life support before viability...they won't survive. but again...that's not the same as taking active steps to end the life before the birth, which is what is done in second and third trimester abortions. Again, that's because you're prochoice. If you were prolife, obviously you'd feel differently. If you were prolife - if you saw the unborn as equal in value to that of a born child - then you'd be saying the exact same thing prolifers are currently saying... which is that abortion should be illegal. after all...you believe infantcide should be illegal, correct? why? Why should that not be a parental decision...a parental choice? because of how you view that infant. However...if my brain stops working (yet my brain stem remains strong)...my body can continue on for YEARS after life support is stopped. and if you walk into my hospital room and put a bullet into my head...you will be brought up on murder charges. Even though my mind is gone. (edited to add: There have been several instances of anencephalic babies born - these are babies born without a brain but with an intact brain stem - whose parents favored euthenizing the baby so that organs could be donated to help other sick babies. They legally were not allowd to do so..and had to watch as the organs deteriorated and waited weeks/months for their baby to die. If at that point they had euthenized the baby...they'd be brought up on murder charges. If they'd euthenized the baby 3 minutes prior to delivery (depending on the state), that would have been perfectly legal.) It's the moment that the head is born that causes them to be viewed as human by the courts (again, depending on the state and depending on in what way you're talking - for example some places allow a fetus to inherit even though it's not born yet)... not brain activity. -------------------------------------------- Elfanie My Skydiving Page Fly Safe - Soft Landings

I asked this previously in this thread, but wasn't responded to.. The 45* rule.. is that from "straight down to jumper" (ie: if you draw a line from door to earth, then from door to jumper, it's a 45* angle)...or from airplane to jumper (ie: if you draw a horizontal line from door to plane tail, then from door to jumper, it's a 45* angle) And does it matter? What I mean is...without getting into physics and mathmatical equations for those of us who aren't fans of physics and calculus... if you look out the door...and wait until the jumper has moved X amount horizontally from the door (45* from straight down to jumper)...are you saying that is unsafe? and if you are saying that is unsafe...what are you saying is a safer alternative to do? (again, for those of us who aren't into physics calculations) -------------------------------------------- Elfanie My Skydiving Page Fly Safe - Soft Landings

But when discussing abortion, we aren't discussing what IS...we discuss what we think SHOULD BE. And there are people who have children and do not submit a birth certificate...don't get their children social security numbers...do not put them on their taxes... (I've worked with several of these people) Are you saying that they should be able to kill that child without being brought up on murder charges because the child's records aren't filed with the state? Or are you saying that if abortion is made illegal, that fetuses should be given social security numbers and used as a tax deduction? -------------------------------------------- Elfanie My Skydiving Page Fly Safe - Soft Landings

*melt melt melt* Alright ladies...now we know who the charmer of the group is. Look out for this one..he's dangerous. *still melting* -------------------------------------------- Elfanie My Skydiving Page Fly Safe - Soft Landings

I'm actually very similar... But I try to just remain logical about it...the fact that we hear about EVERY fatality doesn't mean that they are that common. It just makes it seem like it. Just like when they started reporting all of these shark attacks a couple of years ago, and called it the "summer of the sharks"... shark attacks were actually DOWN that year! It's just that they were reporting them more! or when it seemed like there were a slew of child abductions all of a sudden..so all of the parents started keeping their children inside and not letting them play outside. Abductions weren't up..they were just being reported more so the preception was that the danger had increased and that the danger was extremely high... I try very hard to remain logical about this rather than emotional...look at the REAL risk instead of just the perceived risk. And even still..I go through the same sort of debate that you describe. I ask myself, "how dangerous is it REALLY..and is it worth it?" I came to the conclusion that it's not as dangerous as it may seem (although, as someone else said, it's terribly unforgiving). I just do everything within my power to reduce my risk...and play as safely as I can. If I do that..then I feel that it's very safe. (there was a huge discussion recently about whether it's 'safe' or not...so I'm not trying to get into that again.) Anyways..I, too, cringe every single time I see a new report in Incidents>...and begin to question what I'm doing. so I try to remain logical and look at real risks vs. percieved risks.. -------------------------------------------- Elfanie My Skydiving Page Fly Safe - Soft Landings

I'll be stopping buy Saturday morning..but just to pick up my rig that's being worked on, not to jump. I'll head back over to Coolidge for that. (not that I don't look forward to jumping in Eloy in the near future!) -------------------------------------------- Elfanie My Skydiving Page Fly Safe - Soft Landings

We have lemon, lime, and grapefruit... except the smell in the spring is OVERWHELMING!! My husband likes it..I find it way too strong...way too sweet... -------------------------------------------- Elfanie My Skydiving Page Fly Safe - Soft Landings

My understanding was that the first jumper should be at a 45* angle from straight down...which means you look straight down, then at the jumper, and s/he should be about 45* from straight down...not 45* from airplane to jumper... So that wouldn't have anything to do with how far s/he's falling...it would have to do with how fast the aircraft is going and how fast s/he's moving horizontally from the position of the aircraft in the sky... Now..I've read all of the mathmatical posts about how to calculate separation...and honestly, it makes no sense to me. Are you guys saying that sticking your head out, watching them until they have moved horizontally from your position about |---| yeah much....that's unsafe? Me? I usually wait until someone I know and respect (DZO, instructor, etc) nods and says, "Go!"...but I know that won't always be the case... -------------------------------------------- Elfanie My Skydiving Page Fly Safe - Soft Landings

My altimeter has a light on it...so for those with a digital alti, I'm sure they just use the alti-light for that.. but I was thinking that it wouldn't be too difficult to add anklettes (you can call them "ankle bands" if you want to ) and bracelets and kind of "light" yourself up so others flying around you can see you..at least a little... -------------------------------------------- Elfanie My Skydiving Page Fly Safe - Soft Landings

I didn't have a social security number until I was 15 years old. As for a tax deduction...since when was that a preclude to deserving human rights? Wendy W said the best prochoice argument that there is....that she doesn't believe that it is a human yet deserving of human rights and protection. Absolutely understandable if she feels that way that she's prochoice and that's really the ONLY argument that prochoicers have. (just like the ONLY argument prolifers have is that they believe it's human. All the bible arguments and spirituality doesn't really hold water when you're talking about the law) -------------------------------------------- Elfanie My Skydiving Page Fly Safe - Soft Landings

The ONLY instance that I can think of is in the case of selective reduction...which is not done for the health of the mother, but to try to give the remaining child/ren a better chance at survival. (and that is done very early in the gestation) Now..there are times when a condition present at the beginning of the pregnancy would cause the life of the mother to be in jeapardy (for example, an ectopic pregnancy, or if mother had a severe heart condition or cancer which requires immediate treatment).... but even prolifers agree with abortion being an option in those instances. Even prolifers agree that you should be able to protect yourself against someone else who is threatening your life, even if it means using lethal force. Withdrawl of support does NOT equal euthenasia. withdrawl if support is inducing labor...it is not an abortion. Abortion is euthenasia....quite a different thing. -------------------------------------------- Elfanie My Skydiving Page Fly Safe - Soft Landings

As a relative newbie who had never even contemplated doing a night jump...quick question.. do ya'll wear lights ON you? Like...those light-up necklaces or bracelets or glo-sticks or anything..so you guys can see each other? i've never even seen anyone do a night jump before...so I'm genuinely curious.. -------------------------------------------- Elfanie My Skydiving Page Fly Safe - Soft Landings

HOnestly...out of everything you posted, this is the only truly relevant thing. You do not think that a fetus that has no viability is a person. Period. That is why you are prochoice. If you felt that it was deserving of rights and protections like any born baby, then you'd be pro life. (and may I remind you that abortion is not just legal until viability..in some states, abortions are legal up until delivery. You can be full term pregnant and obtain an abortion..) whoah whoah whoah... this is so...WRONG to say. Just because searching for the baby would be futile does NOT in any way indicate a lack of concern or that they feel that the embryonic death is not the same as a baby's. And not everyone has a burial for their loved ones..... what do you consider 'meaningful'? And are you saying that there is a minimum level of brain activity before they should be given rights? (serious question..not an accusatory question) If so..are you willing to put that standard over to born people? in other words...brain activity can detected in a fetus at 10 weeks... if you're going to put a minimum level of brain activity as a marker at which abortion can not be performed...then do you also support legislation legalizing euthenization of children/adults who also do not show that same level of brain activity? It's not science that abortion rights are based on. Scientifically speaking, life is created when sperm meets egg. Scientifically speaking, it is a separate life from that of either the mother or the father. ?Scientifically speaking, a newborn baby isn't the same as a toddler..different brain, different body, different abilities, different stage of development....which isn't the same as an adolescent, or an adult, or an elderly.. Science is on the side of prolifers. But what we're talking here isn't scientifically...it's legally. Legally, we do not give the same rights to 'critters' (dogs, flies, elephants) as we do humans...so the question is a legal one. When do we consider this 'critter' to become "human worthy of human rights"? It's a philisophical debate.. which would be an understandable argument...except that it's irrelevant. What this has to assume is that there are situations in which the mother's life is at risk which ABORTING the baby would better protect the mother - whereas simply removing the baby (not aborting it) would put mother's life in greater jeapordy. What situation is that? Or aborting a baby with complications incompatable with life...if you argue in favor of that, then you should also be consistant and argue in favor of euthenasia in instances of a child/adult having a complication incompatable with life. If a child is diagnosed with a terminal brain tumor, do you support euthenizing that child? The abortion is not a debate of whether someone has the right to believe what they want.. it is a debate of whether someone has the right to DO what they want. And it comes down to this.. if you feel it is a person - you'll be prolife if you feel it is not a person yet - you'll be prochoice. If you feel it's a peson, then allowing the right to abort is like saying, "Go ahead and kill your 5 year old child.." if you feel it is not a person, then preventing abortions is like saying, "You can not do with your body what you want..you can't get a nose job, you can't color your hair, and we're going to tell you that you have to give birth to a child even if you don't want to." Is it a person? THAT is the only relevant question... Again, to a prolifer...that's like saying that if you regret having a child then you should have the right to kill that child...as a backup. if it's a child..it's a child...and it already exists (to prolifers). Abortion isn't a backup mechanism to a prolifer..it's killing. It's a backup mechanism to a prochoicer. But is there any surprise that someone that feels that it is a person responds the way that they do? -------------------------------------------- Elfanie My Skydiving Page Fly Safe - Soft Landings

With my husband and children. Anyplace...having fun. Beach, amusement park, at the movies...doesn't matter. as long as my husband and kids are there. -------------------------------------------- Elfanie My Skydiving Page Fly Safe - Soft Landings

this is what I was trained to do and all I really have done.. Can you share why you believe this doesn't work? -------------------------------------------- Elfanie My Skydiving Page Fly Safe - Soft Landings

sorry... but I've been listening to it nonstop since you posted it...what an AWESOME 'station' it is!!! Although it's making me slightly irritated at the fact that you can't find a station like this on the car radio. Thank you for posting this...thank you thank you. *smoochie on your cheek* -------------------------------------------- Elfanie My Skydiving Page Fly Safe - Soft Landings

so you take the picture in color... because with photoshop you can make it black and white in about 3 seconds. (however..I'd save our president and not take a picture) -------------------------------------------- Elfanie My Skydiving Page Fly Safe - Soft Landings

*nods* but that's finding them for curiosity... not for validation. and the problem isn't being adopted or not having met their genetic parents.. the problem is the lies and the lack of information. Not having medical information...not knowing what happened...maybe being lied to by their parents (if it's not something to be ashamed of, then why lie? If they were lied to, then it must be a source of shame, right? at least, that's what most adoptees who are lied to think.) The ideal solution: not getting pregnant in the first place In some instances, placing the baby is the best solution when faced with an unwanted pregnancy. In some instances, raising the baby is the best solution when faced with an unwanted pregnancy. as for abortion...that all depends on what side of the abortion debate you stand on, doesn't it? For prolifers, that's NEVER the best solution...for prochoicers, there are many times when that is the best solution. but I do want to add that Teens are least likely to place a baby for adoption (interestingly enough). Of teens who find themselves pregnant, 51% give birth, 35% seek abortions, 14% miscarry. Less than 1% choose to place their children for adoption. And again I will go back to the fact that the best solution is to prevent unwanted pregnancies in the first place...either through education and promotion of abstinence or through responsible use of birth control methods. -------------------------------------------- Elfanie My Skydiving Page Fly Safe - Soft Landings

While adoption isn't the perfect solution (the perfect solution is to avoid unwanted pregnancies in the first place)... I hardly think you're "one of the few". MOST adoptees that I know are quite happy with their lives, their families, and are at peace with being adopted. Mind if I ask your age? Because you appear very young... (and that is in no way meant in a bad way...it's just that most teens/young adults are screwed up in the head just by existing. What I mean is...most teens/young adults at least feel screwed up in the head, period - adopted or not...until they are in their mid/late 20's...and has little to do with being adopted. Start a poll here and ask, "How many of you felt screwed up in the head when you were 19?" and see what the response is like..) And this goes totally against all studies that have been done... studies have shown that those who are likely to search are... Female adoptees who are the result of a closed adoption who are either planning on becoming pregnant in the near future or are currently pregnant. Nearly always it is out of curiosity and medical questions. Rarely is it for any sort of need for validation. Me? I was adopted by my dad...my first son is adopted (open adoption - birthparents both lived with us the last 4 months of the pregnancy)...my daughter is the result of donor egg IVF...we've placed for adoption 6 embryos... So my immediate family consists of a child that is not biologically related to me that I did not carry, a child that is not biologically related to me that I did carry, a child that is biologically related that I carried...and we possibly have some babies out there that are genetically related to us that are not carried or raised by me. I am also the director of the CAPPA Advanced Adoption Certification Program that trained birth professionals to deal with adoption situations. -------------------------------------------- Elfanie My Skydiving Page Fly Safe - Soft Landings

Actually, if they are 11, no. If they are 16, no. If they are 20..absolutely. Once an adult, emancipated or of the age of 18, then legally they are an adult and the parents are no longer legally responsible for them or their actions or any results of their actions. there are two things being discussed here...one is emotions and values, and the other is laws and legalities. emotionally speaking..of course parents should have an active role in their childrens lives and open communication and blah blah blah. legally speaking is a totally different thing..and legally we, as parents, are responsible for our children's decisions until the are adults. Why is an abortion separated and secluded and put into its own catagory? If a minor can not legally have a medical proceedure without parental consent, why is an abortion any different? and that's not to say that I think that the physician should tell the parents... but I don't think it should be legal for them to obtain an abortion without parental consent. -------------------------------------------- Elfanie My Skydiving Page Fly Safe - Soft Landings