obfuscator

I'm all for her making informed decisions, I agree with you. I'm trying very hard not to interpret the facts to fit my point of view--it's why I'm trying to heavily emphasis that not only do they need to have a talk, but this will cause her to cement her beliefs. Therefore it's really important that they're together as a couple for this. I know that a scare like this did for me, anyway, and I was always glad to have my boyfriend beside me. Fair enough.

Actually, it's interesting that the other forum has the same problem. Odd.

You can put different labels on it all you'd like. Chances are she doesn't know what she objects to, and this is a catalyzing moment. It's pretty clear-cut. The morning after pill prevents a fertilized embryo from attaching itself to the uterine lining, therefore killing it; which is abortion. I just want to be clear on that fact, because it is a fact. Don't you agree people should be given all the information they need to make an informed decision?

Well statistically? You have like a 70-some% chance that she's not pregnant anyway, regardless of the Plan B pill. (Oh ovulation, you so silly.) I would wait a little bit, let the frustration subside, and go talk to her. You need to be there for eachother. I know you've got this timer ticking down in your head but if she's unsure and/or doesn't like abortion she will hesitate until it's too late. Being there with her could help. Once again, taking the plan B pill while pregnant is a chemical abortion. Some people only object to a physical abortion, but if it's abortion at large she objects to then it's already too late (if she's actually pregnant).

For the first time in four years, I have to write an essay for school.

I missed the game, had class from 7-10 :wall: I heard on the radio that it was not a good hit. I haven't seen the hit so no comments yet but what do you think he will get? It's very reminiscent of Steckel on crosby - obviously a hit to the head, but it's going to be hard to prove intent. Grabo was fine as well so it takes some pressure of Shanahan. I honestly have no idea what to expect.

Related: http://www.thestar.com/business/article/1060245--video-stock-trader-who-dreams-of-another-recession-revealed?bn=1

Of course there's a difference in opinion - and in my opinion those laws are sexist and controlling. Of course the women there are free to like those laws if they want; but there is significant dissent from women against those laws too. I fail to see, as well, how prosecution of rape victims can be construed as "protection".

Close, but I have to go with chuck.

If your gf is strongly against abortion, taking any pill now is basically a chemical abortion, as fertilization would have happened already.

0.

When did it first start going bad? I didn't read the previous pages. What happened? Did you hit your head? Did you have an ear infection? On any new medications? etcetc EDIT: Missing period two too. What the [bleep]. Don't worry, as long as you don't miss the third period it's okay. But even then, maybe there will be overtime so you can watch that.

Yeah, a shoutbox would get filled up way too fast.

I don't get more than 60 fps and tf2 seems fine for me...

Sharia law, which is fairly sexist and controlling. (from what I've seen anyway, I won't claim to be an expert). I think you need to go do some more reading then. Please, enlighten me :) EDIT: Well, I did some more research, and found the following. http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2010/nea/154472.htm But perhaps I'm interpreting this incorrectly.

I think it is that any law based on religion is inherently an opinion of a deity that may or may not exist and that everyone governed by the laws is, through being made to follow those laws, being forced to accept a certain religion's views as correct or right. One of the basic human rights is freedom of religion (Article 18, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, approved by the UN, enacted and agreed upon by all countries except Kosovo, Taiwan, and the Vatican), and it seems to me (I am not certain) that this violates that right. So you're saying the laws are only unfair if the deity exists?

If you want to define a specific moral statement, sure. It's just where the morals originate that's the issue; more so than the morals themselves.

Yeah, I was thinking on touching on that as well. Sexism is rampant in NA as well, it's just a little more disguised. Plus the political leeway we give to Saudi Arabia as well..

Well, I'm really looking forward to seeing what Shanahan does with that Neil on Grabo hit. The first really controversial one of the year.

There's nothing fallacious at all. What's fallacious and hypocritical is the atheist dogma that religion is man-made, all religious law is garbage, and their own man-made law should be followed instead. Either all men are fallible, or they aren't. Just because atheism is the flavour of the month doesn't mean its proponents are any less prone to fallacy than the religious.

But according to your atheist belief, religion is man-made. Therefore religious law is man-made law. Therefore man-made law is ridiculous and an imposition on everyone...

Sharia law, which is fairly sexist and controlling. (from what I've seen anyway, I won't claim to be an expert). So it's based on religion? :rolleyes: :mellow: Yes. Did I deny this? You seem to think you've caught me in some kind of conspiracy or contradiction.....

Sharia law, which is fairly sexist and controlling. (from what I've seen anyway, I won't claim to be an expert).

Well, that's the difficulty in practical application. But certainly as humans we are imperfect; and as a result are not a good source of absolute moral authority.