It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Abortion Group Holds 'Screw Abstinance' Festival

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 11:34 PM
link   
The Washington State NARAL pro-abortion group is holding a 'screw abstinance' party to promote sex and the unwanted pregnancies that lead to abortion:



Tired of Bush & Co. spending your tax dollars on abstinence-only-until-marriage initiatives that promote dangerous misinformation?

Let them know you keep it real when it comes to your sexual health and decision making.

Come laugh, learn, socialize and buck the system at NARAL Pro-Choice Washington’s Screw Abstinence Party.

Featuring:
Pork Filled Players – Seattle theatre’s hottest sketch comedy group performs a sex ed class for adults
Toys in Babeland – Seattle’s sleaze-free, sex-positive purveyors of adult toys offer tips on “Sexy Safer Sex”
Lady Jane DJ – Seattle’s First Lady of the turn tables spins the latest in Hip-Hop and R&B
Hors d’oeuvres – Scrumptious Appetizers generously donated by Watertown.

www.wanaral.org...


This is disgusting


This proves that pro-abortion groups are just that, they want to see the most babies possible killed wantonly by the murderous unethical doctors that perform the procedure.

[edit on 7/13/2005 by djohnsto77]




posted on Jul, 14 2005 @ 10:32 AM
link   
I thinks its one thing for a group to advocate a potential "option" for women who become accidentally pregnant and need a way out but to cross the line into actually promoting acheiving an unwanted pregnancy so one can get an abortion seems and bit self-defeating to me. I'm certain no woman wants to get an abortion for the fun of the experience. I understand why they support the legal aspect of being able to get one even though I do not personally subscribe to it but this seems over the top.

If its one thing pro-abortion groups should support, I would think it would be the prevention of unwanted pregnancy to begin with. I mean, if your goal is no children born into poverty and to women who don't want them, should you not be proactive in the cause as well as active in the remedy when prevention did not work?

I think what we're seeing here is a loss of vision by people who started out with a just cause and had it mutate into a political agenda. Now, they want women to get pregnant so they can have abortions? So, now the cause is not keeping children from being born to women who cannot care for them or do not want them, its creating as many oportunities as possible for the abortion proceedure to be preformed?

I mean, lets not beat around the bush, thats what this is all about. Its went from an organization who champions women's rights to a fan club of the proceedure.

I certainly hope this is satire and not authentic.



posted on Jul, 14 2005 @ 11:02 AM
link   
I'm really not sure where you guys are getting the idea that they are actually promoting this idea of purposefully getting pregnant to get abortions. No where in that link does it say that.


All funds raised at Screw Abstinence will assist NARAL Pro-Choice Washington in our work to secure comprehensive and medically accurate sex education, as well as guarantee every woman the right to make personal decisions regarding the full range of reproductive choices.


It really sounds more like they hate Bush and promote safe sex, as opposed to this idea of, hmm... killing babies.

How djohnsto77 came to the conclusion that this is to promote "sex and unwanted pregnancies that lead to abortion" I will never know.



posted on Jul, 14 2005 @ 11:23 AM
link   
Well, its just that the title of the rally "screw abstinance" really screws it.

lets look at it logically. (so if you have a political agenda, the rest of this is going to be hard to comprehend)

The main goal of people who support abotion has to be one of two things.

1. the miminization of unwanted pregnacy/children.

2. the promotion of the actual proceedure for profit or just because they're that stupid.


Now, I'm guessing that most supporters of this are inn it for number one which I think is a good.

My point is, that if this is the ultimate goal of these supporters, would it not be wise to include all issues that might prevent it. Would abstinance not be the first line of defense in this?

Abstinance, preventative birth control, the "morning after pill", and lastly abortion.

It occurs to me that demonizing the CHOICE to abstain from sex just because a political group you disagree with is asinine. Isn't the free choice of abstaining just as good a way to avoid unwanted pregnancy as using birth control or having an abortion? Do all three of these not go toward the same goal? Then why demonize one? What of Bush had endorsed birth control. Would this group then be ready to say screw birth control?

If your goal is the decline of unwanted pregnancy, then I would think you would support any and all measures to reach it.

Which is why I draw the conclusion that they don't want a reduction of unwanted pregnancy as much as they want an increase in abotions. Most of these losers have never had to have one so they easily make the decision that they're cool. In reality, its usually a last resort of someone who is in need of help or very despirate. I don't believe we have that many women getting pregnant and having abotions so haphazardly. I'd bet this proceedure, even when performed in a good environment is no walk in the park for the poor woman.



posted on Jul, 14 2005 @ 11:23 AM
link   
Who cares? Let em have all the abortions they want. It aint your body, it aint your problem. You need to live and let live.

Personally, if woman wants a 1000 abortions, I could care less. It aint none of mine or YOUR business. Damn republicans.

[edit on 14-7-2005 by spliff4020]

[edit on 14-7-2005 by spliff4020]



posted on Jul, 14 2005 @ 11:39 AM
link   
I personally see this as more of a satirical ploy. I mean, what better way to get everyone's attention than to come right off the deep end? And I'm sure there'll be a lot of poorly informed people going to this thing thinking it's going to be an orgy of some kind, or at least somewhere they can get a few numbers.

Think about it: would you guys have paid any attention to it at all if the headline would've been "Pro-abortion Sponsored Educational Lecture"? Probably a little, but it wouldn't have caught your eye as well. Sensationalism sells, and although it might be a bit of a stretch to say there's absolutely no such thing as bad publicity, it's pretty hard to completely alienate people with a moderately extreme situation.

Aside from that, it may also be completely designed as a protest, much in the same vein people protest anti flag-burning legislation by burning flags, or unions protest longer work hours by going on strike. It might be immature in some respects, but it's also the best way to get people to notice you for better or worse.



posted on Jul, 14 2005 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by spliff4020
Who cares? Let em have all the abortions they want. It aint your body, it aint your problem. You need to live and let live.

Personally, if woman wants a 1000 abortions, I could care less. It aint none of mine or YOUR business. Damn republicans.

[edit on 14-7-2005 by spliff4020]

[edit on 14-7-2005 by spliff4020]


First off, I'm no republican but I got common freakin' sense as posted above and I would expect that logic to be met with this ideology when in truth, many of the people who are pushing this rally fall into the same catagory. If they're not pregnant, then what business is it of theirs if someone abstains from sex so that "none of your business" crap is a double edged sword.

Personally, if a woman wanted 1000 abortions, I wouldn't care either unless one was my child however, this being a discussion forum for general ideological topics and being that no one here is dictating policy, this site is used for people to express views on subjects that are really none of their business.ie..me, you and every other person on here. If you don't care about the topic, skip it, easy as that.

Your post in itself means that you just commented on something that was none of YOUR business either! And, all it added was an emotionally charged temper tantrum tantamount to screaming 13 year old drama queen to a thread in which a subject was logically and calmly being discussed.

I never once made a negative remark toward the practice of abortion, merely advocated the other ideologies which strive to acheive the same goal.

We have a lot of people out there who need to live and let live and many of them will be on the front row at this event. The irony in you making that statement is , in itself, comical if it wasn't for the seriousness of the issue.



posted on Jul, 14 2005 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by MCory1


Think about it: would you guys have paid any attention to it at all if the headline would've been "Pro-abortion Sponsored Educational Lecture"? Probably a little, but it wouldn't have caught your eye as well. Sensationalism sells, and although it might be a bit of a stretch to say there's absolutely no such thing as bad publicity, it's pretty hard to completely alienate people with a moderately extreme situation.



Thats a good point. I mean, although I don't side with abortion, I never expected those who do to be in it just so women would have them..merely to make sure their right to it is protected.

I never thought of them as just blood hungry baby killers but people compassionate to the true and real issues that face women with unwanted pregnancy. This was really pushing that perception..and though many may have now taken this on as just a political battle, many I'm sure still have their true idea at heart.


I first thought that if this was just some sort of shock value marketing ploy, it was a mistake but your reasoning may be correct and it might just be a new direction though I think its in bad taste but some things are.



posted on Jul, 14 2005 @ 11:57 AM
link   
I assure you I have no agenda, was just a bit disappointed in the original poster for jumping to such an odd conclusion that it was wanting people to get pregnant for abortions.

Remember, some people just really like sex. Perhaps that is why they skip the abstinance stage? I really do not know enough about the group itself to be sure.

And like MCory1 said, it seems to be more of a ploy to get noticed.

So, if none of the above is true, that is; if the group is really serious about simply "screwing" abstinance, then it would make sense to draw the conclusion that you did. However, I strongly doubt that is true, and agree with MCory1 as to the reasoning behind this all. Nicely done MCory1



edit: spelling and grammar, also, I do agree astrocreep, it is a bit in bad taste.

[edit on 14-7-2005 by IMPerial]



posted on Jul, 14 2005 @ 12:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
The Washington State NARAL pro-abortion group is holding a 'screw abstinance' party to promote sex and the unwanted pregnancies that lead to abortion:



Tired of Bush & Co. spending your tax dollars on abstinence-only-until-marriage initiatives that promote dangerous misinformation?

Let them know you keep it real when it comes to your sexual health and decision making.

Come laugh, learn, socialize and buck the system at NARAL Pro-Choice Washington’s Screw Abstinence Party.

Featuring:
Pork Filled Players – Seattle theatre’s hottest sketch comedy group performs a sex ed class for adults
Toys in Babeland – Seattle’s sleaze-free, sex-positive purveyors of adult toys offer tips on “Sexy Safer Sex”
Lady Jane DJ – Seattle’s First Lady of the turn tables spins the latest in Hip-Hop and R&B
Hors d’oeuvres – Scrumptious Appetizers generously donated by Watertown.

www.wanaral.org...


This is disgusting


This proves that pro-abortion groups are just that, they want to see the most babies possible killed wantonly by the murderous unethical doctors that perform the procedure.



I had to quote every bit of your post because there's not one line in it that isn't exactly the kind of dangerous misinformation that these pro-CHOICE groups are backlashing against.

No that flyer is not disgusting. Their disgust however is well placed.

Bush & Co. spending my tax dollars on abstinence-only-until-marriage initiatives that promote dangerous misinformation, leading to unwanted pregnancies and increased abortions is disgusting.

And if a bunch of adults want to get together and have a tongue in cheek "screw abstinence" party (by which anyone who doesn't have their head up under a rock reads as "Screw Bush Abstinence Only Faith Based Community Initiatives on My Dime in My Schools with MY Kids" so what? They can have an adult sex education lecture and sell condoms if they want. Still a free country. For now.

Man, get over yourselves. "This proves..." blah, blah, blah. :shk:



posted on Jul, 14 2005 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Get over myself? I am still trying to get over the fact that the listerine girl hates me...



posted on Jul, 14 2005 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by astrocreep
Get over myself? I am still trying to get over the fact that the listerine girl hates me...




Sorry.
Just woke up. Coffee. Feeling better now.



posted on Jul, 14 2005 @ 01:23 PM
link   
I agree that this is probably sensationalism to get more attention.

But it flies in the face of the "legal, safe, and rare" argument that the Clintons made and has been the most successful pro-abortion message in U.S. politics. It seems to celebrate carelessness and abortion on demand as the solution to that carelessness.

[edit on 7/14/2005 by djohnsto77]



posted on Jul, 14 2005 @ 05:37 PM
link   
Astrocreep....settle down....i wasnt talking to you, but the poster...christ.
wtf...



Abstinance--- ya right....ever been 16 or 17? You really need a clue here. Noone can stop them from screwing. Your wasting valuable oxygen on the topic. The kids laugh at you.




Which is why I draw the conclusion that they don't want a reduction of unwanted pregnancy as much as they want an increase in abotions. Most of these losers have never had to have one so they easily make the decision that they're cool.


So let me get this straight. Kids think abortions are "cool" now? Thats honestly what you think? Wow.


Well, on a side note, I am "pro-abortion", and I DO think there should be more. I think women should use common sense and realize when they arent going to able to raise one, that it is a perfectly fine alternative. Noone should demonize them for it, INCLUDING THEIR PARENTS. You have your life, they have theirs.

Telling em not to have sex is up there with tellin em not to drink. A giant waste of time.



posted on Jul, 14 2005 @ 06:46 PM
link   
This is a moral issue, fundamentally. The group throwing that sexual shindig are probably not members of the Christian right. They don't share the same values. To them, the party will be fun and people will sell crap. Maybe even have (GASP!) sex afterwards... with people they are not bequeathed to...


To those who hold religious beliefs that kind of behavior borders on deviant. Being a Christian, and having liberal and artistic friends, I can say I've seen things at parties that would offend a lot of church/mosque-goers. The bottom line is my judgement of them is irrelevant and vice/versa.

I believe (in most cases) abortion is used as an easy out. People play, but they don't wanna pay. So they go do the thing. That is selfish in the extreme. That selfishness is SIN. There are cases though where its necessary. Necessary means for health reasons, rape and incest.

Although I am a Christian and a Republican, I support the Roe v. Wade decision and am not for overturning it. It's a practical position. Based on the history of abortion in this country, I cannot support going backwards legally. It is a personal matter that should be between the person and their God.



posted on Jul, 14 2005 @ 07:32 PM
link   
After been in the side with the link provided it seems to me that this is nothing more than a satirical way to take care of educating people on safe and enjoyable sex, without the ramifications of unwanted pregnancy.

The “abstinence” is actually is not working not matter how much the government and religious groups try to show different, trying to make a natural act like sex wrong and dirty is not going to work.

The government instead of spending money on something that is not going to happen like not having sex, it should put effort and time on preparing the young people to be responsible.

djohnsto77

I wonder what you find so “disgusting” the issue of abortions or the issue of having free enjoyable and very rewarding sex, without the side effects when you are ready and prepared to do so.

I do.



posted on Jul, 15 2005 @ 12:01 AM
link   
If you're coming from a spiritual standpoint, you're thinking of accepting parentage the moment you have sex.

You take it lightly; and so do I, to an extent; but some people are straight prudes.



posted on Jul, 15 2005 @ 07:52 AM
link   
To those of you who seem to be wanting to turn this thread into an anti-abortion thread, I for one, appreciate your all's personal beliefs on the issue and I see the logic behind each and every one of them pro-choice or pro-life. If this was an easy issue, it would not be so heavily debated and i think we all need to let go of our stance that our opinion on it is the only justified stance and accept that its a tough subject.

That being said, the issue of this thread is not an attack on abortion but an attack on those who choose to be abstinate as their form of preventing unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted deseases. I have been 16 and believe it or not 17 and I will admit I was sexually active at the time with someone of equal age so I'd be a hypocrit for condemning it of others and I'm not. What I'm saying and all I'm saying is that if some people choose to use abstinance to acheive the same lofty goals as pro-abortion groups, then should they be demonized? That is assuming that goal is the reduction of unwanted pregnancy and children born into poverty.

I understand this is not an easy sell for teens but what about 11 to 15 year old kids who are becoming sexually active because there's such a demonization of abstinance. Who needs to be sexually active at 12 years old? This is the group that should be targeted with the abstinance rhetoric and if you are an adult who believes is fine for kids that age to have sex, well then you may want to keep that to yourselves in light of recent events.



posted on Jul, 15 2005 @ 08:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
But it flies in the face of the "legal, safe, and rare" argument that the Clintons made and has been the most successful pro-abortion message in U.S. politics. It seems to celebrate carelessness and abortion on demand as the solution to that carelessness.


Not really. If you read it, again, it talks about "sexy safer sex." They are not promoting abortion and carelessness at all, but real education about sex rather than just saying "DON'T DO IT" and providing misinformation. You're not going to prevent abortions by teaching abstinence, plain and simple.



posted on Jul, 15 2005 @ 09:28 AM
link   
Abstinance should be touted as a preventative measure, just like telling people not to drink is a reasonable way to keep them from drinking and driving. Keeping to that analogy, I have a lot of respect for my dad--when I was around the necessary age, he told me that I shouldn't drink, no question about it. But, if I did, then... so on and so forth.

The same message should be sent regarding sex. Stay away from it until you're older and in love, but if you do get a little too frisky, then here's the options you have. I know a lot of people see that as promoting sex, I personally never have looked at it that way, and when adults told me that when I was growing up I didn't see it as them condoning it in anyway. It's realistic though. If you don't keep your kid chained up, either physically or psychologically, they will try and get some action. At the very least, they'll consider it. There's always exceptions to the rule, but from my experiences those exceptional people were very few and far between.

ECK,
You are correct, from a spiritual standpoint you should be prepared to take parental responsibility from the moment the lights go out (or the ignition turns off, what ever the case may be.) But I never met teenager who had been or considered being sexually active in any way and looked at it as a means to procreate. Occasionally it was a way of expressing their love, often looking for some type of acceptance from someone they liked, and quite frequently it was more of just "I'm in the mood, are you?" Of course, I didn't exactly go to a religious school, so I might have a rather skewed view on the subject.

Back to the original issue at hand, given that the "hidden" agenda for this party is to teach safe sex, I highly doubt these people are truly calling for more abortions, as astrocreep suggested quite a few posts back. I'm sure there's a few out there, but I truly doubt that anyone in the public eye would openly seek for more abortions to be held. I've never met a pro-choicer who was keen on the idea of abortion as birth control, but more so that it should be an available option. That's the stance I personally take--it should be up to the woman, although I personally would rather my fiance put a kid up for adoption if we were in a situation that wasn't life-threatening.

Seeing that this was held yesterday, do we have anyone in the ranks who went and can enlighten us to what happened? Also, one other note--this "party" wasn't exactly being used to promote any kind of sex to teenagers, safe or otherwise; it was 21+ only according to the flyer.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join