Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (32274)	2/5/1999 9:56:00 AM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

I have no problem with sex education that is age appropriate and does not push an agenda, but provides information. Is that enough? I don't know, you tell me. "Does not push an agenda", is a fairly ambiguous phrase. It sounds good in principle, but I can't imagine it leading to very responsible sex education if it's interpreted in a way that would satisfy most who want to eliminate "the abortion on demand regime". Again, I'm reluctant to go into this full bore, it's certainly not an issue that's a high priority to me. I think it is, properly, a women's issue. In past debates, I've pointed out repeatedly that about 90% of abortions are in the first trimester. My reading on the PBA issue was always that most people pushing the ban really wanted to ban abortions, not just late term abortions or a particular procedure. If you want to cut into that 90%, without a legislative ban, it's going to take a lot of work, and serious consideration of things like the "morning after pill" that's quietly available in college health centers but not widely known elsewhere. The morning after pills are not widely known about, of course, for fear of bringing them to the attention of the right to lifers. Ru-486 is in a similar situation.