dickleyjones

ah, that was purely theoretical for those who do believe. some things we could do now to help (eg early detection of pregnancy, regular testing). others we need more research (eg genetic manipulation, uterine structure, autoimmune disease). certainly more can be done.

sometimes it is genetic, sometimes not. many (if not all) possibly avoidable ie not "meant to be". one person (me) is "the left" now? why do conversations always have to devolve this way?

not knowing they're pregnant, that's true, but if there is a miscarriage the human zygote still dies. it doesn't matter if you know or not. "meant to be" wtf is that supposed to mean? in a medical context coming from a medical professional, no less.

I think that if one believes that a human zygote is equivalent to a child, there is not nearly enough effort, considering the millions of deaths. Again, it in something on the magnitude of at least 1/4 (likely much more) of all deaths in usa each year. i mean, if the medical community really considered zygotes living children, there is no question in my mind that efforts to reduce miscarriage would be pushed hard. And those that do consider zygotes = child should also pour at least some of their efforts into that travesty. Sorry i wasn't clear.

I thought we were talking less than 8 weeks, the point was about human zygotes being equal to a child.

We will have to disagree on that.

i agree, and am definitely open to discussing things. westside wants to call me a liar and refer to me as a "cult radical" but i am not that. and of course he has zero evidence of such. i'm certainly not entreched on a "side" although i'm sure you would consider me more left than right (being canadian that's kind of the default anyways compared to usa). i think there are insane people of all political leanings.

"Natural"? What do you think that means? Plenty of miscarriages are preventable, who knows how many though since we dont put many resources into research in that area. And we also dont know how many miscarriages go unnoticed, the estimate is very high. Go ahead call it ridiculous, it just makes you sound uninformed.

Not with the urgency and resources that the other top killers do.

exactly.

even if we can't explain it - shouldn't we be working our asses off to prevent it? miscarriage accounts for 1/4 to 1/3 of all deaths in the USA every year, if human zygotes = human being.

Not nearly enough when it comes to miscarriage, no great push for it either. I mean a MAJOR push for the likely 1 million human zygotes lost in the usa alone every year. And i meant support for women during pregnancy, to minimize miscarriages. Yes mental health support is helpful and needed and that's good, but preventing miscarriage would be better. And if god is real, and human zygotes are innocent children, he is the single most prolific abortionist in existence by far. what shall be done with this scourge of humanity?

At least 10% of all pregnancies end in miscarriage. That estimate is low, many women don't realize they were pregnant and miscarried. If human zygotes = a human child, miscarriage is the #1 killer of children bar none. If i believed in god, i'd probably be pretty pissed off at him about that, who else to blame for such a colossal amount of murder and atrocity? And we should probably pour massive amounts of $$ into miscarriage research and support for women, preventing miscarriage should be a top priority.

bman posted a cartoon. I posted the opposite cartoon. i thought that was funny because that's basically what it is like in here. I guess i was hoping i'd get a cartoon reply. i was disappointed.

this is not a cartoon reply. i mean...right back atcha?

these are fun

we saw what the Cinci defense did to KC. having 3 good pass blocking LBs could be interesting.

ah, well then, because you say so then i must be wrong. sorry about that.

so...because you don't agree with someone's fetish/lifestyle this means an entire generation is a disaster, and you can conclude it's going to get "more insane". interesting logic. can't we just like...let people do what they want and not judge? as long as he is not hurting another person, who cares what this dude does for pleasure. ffs.

This was in response to another post...there is no off track. chill.

i don't think you could ever erase "family" type projects from the curriculum. if it's not a "my family" project, it's a "what i did last summer" or what have you. most kids know their families better than anything else. they are a great basis for learning. these issues are going to come up in some way, and yes, as long as it is approached with kindness, empathy, understanding, it should be ok.

yep, looks like we are on the same page. i was thinking of another very common situation in grade school - kids doing projects and presentations about their families. we all did it. so, when Jimmy gets up in front of the class and shows some pictures (not sexually explicit pictures, obviously) of his two dads, sister, and dog as he presents and talks about his family, i would hope that is considered ok in the context of this law.

teachers are more than just that. kids get hurt, teased, bullied, whatever, i'm sure a kind word from the teacher helps at that time. i know it helped me when my parents were getting divorced when i was little. it's not like my teacher had any incredible insight that solved my problems. but even just kind words from someone you trust in a time like that is appreciated and is the right thing to do.

so, unless i missed something else, this seems to be the relevant bit: "3. Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards." so on the one hand it's pretty vague, but "classroom instruction" implies that there won't be specific curriculum or class times dedicated to sexual orientation or gender identity. it does seem discriminatory to be so specific, but at the same time there are many things that are not taught as a class. if, however, it means that a teacher is to *never* reference gender or sexual orientation, i have to disagree with that. kids need to be able to ask questions and teachers need to provide answers. sure, you are not going to want teachers to explain details of sexual intercourse and the like. but explaining to a child that yes, some kids have two moms and the two moms love each other just like a mom and dad love each other, should be allowed imo.

Canadian parent of a lesbian child here. i am curious about what's going on in florida. but as usual it's difficult to get proper info. is this about not allowing sexuality to be taught as a class for young kids? or is it more strict than that? for example, if a kid asks teacher "how can Timmy have two moms?" is a teacher allowed to give any answer at all? as someone with relevant experience, i'd like to jump in on the conversation but it's become pretty cloudy as to what this is actually about.