General Chat

Daff the person whom deleteed has said she did .....


And as for Janey she has been quite rude directing us to a pig waving good bye and quoteing latin which says
The thing speaks for its self ....AND i do understand this thing to be the reasearch but it doesnt come across like that

The pig waving goodbye is a famous cartoon character. "That's all, folks!" as spoken by that pig is a widely recognized popular idiom.

"Res ipsa loquitur" has the literal meaning of "the thing speaks for itself". What it means, in use, is: no additional proof is needed, the fact is obvious on its face.

In this case, two facts: the anti-intellectualism in this thread, and the preference for personal attack over discussion and for untruth over fact, as a way of "winning" a debate. An debate in which someone has a vested interest, usually -- the facts need to be covered up, and the arguments need to be ignored, because they would lead to something that someone doesn't want; and a person needs to be discredited because if people listened to that person, they might be persuaded to do something they must *at all costs* be kept from doing.

A lot of people have a vested interest in keeping women down. So we must appeal to feelings and anecdote, and use sentimental babytalk, to keep people from considering facts and arguments. And we must claim that women who stand up for women's rights, and who use facts and arguments rather than feelings and babytalk, are really men. And so on ... and on ... and on ... and on.

Kemp...... I read some of what was deleted!

But the attacks on Janey started right from the start........ she had barely written anything... now I don't always agree with her... but she never attacks a person unless it is in response to an attack on her..... and during the rest of the thread there are many goads... so she may have been *quite rude* but others were *very rude*...

if each one of you had taken the time to actually read what sources were being quoted by Len, then you would have to agree with Janey... they are very very dodgy sources to be used as a statement of fact... and Len did not make it clear at all that his thread was based on dodgy anecdotal evidence... read it, and then come back and tell me that Janey (and I, now) don't have a valid point.

You say that

Quote fom Kempinasunhat at 15.57 ** AND i do understand this thing to be the reasearch but it doesnt come across like that **

Well my point is that you DIDN'T understand... if you did, you wouldn't have reacted the way you did........ if you had read the links she gave you (which Len should really have put up) you would have seen that Janey was right to warn us... this book is anti-female, anti-choice, and I will make a wild stab in the dark assumption here, probably anti-abortion as well..... it is propagandist.. now before you argue with me that it isn't.. go and read it for yourself!

The book that Len is quoting from, is a very very dodgy book.... and that is just reading one little itsy bit!! Go on, I dare you... read it!

Lol Janey..... I am used to not being taken seriously, it's ok, lol..... just as long as you didn't ruin a keyboard when you giggled, that's ok, lol

Well.... I am off to find a non-debating thread to become embroiled in!

Love

Daff xxx

www.justthefacts.org.clar.asp (Schools’ Project 2009)


“30th week. She is now using the four senses: vision, hearing, taste and touch. She recognizes her mother’s voice…..”

She is gaining weight rapidly and by the end of the 7th month may weigh 4lb….”

“35th week: She is responding to familiar noises such as her mother’s voice and music”

Using vision?

It's pretty dark in there; I shouldn't think she'd see much!

I do know though, that my youngest who was born without the use of drugs, recognised my voice just after she was born, that was obvious.

Birdi

Your link

www.justthefacts.org.clar.asp (Schools’ Project 2009)

doesn't actually show the place you got this information from, as a primary research source... although I will agree that at birth a child will respond to feelings that are familiar... which is why mothers from ancient times swaddle (wrap up cosily) and many will leave a ticking clock next to a fretful baby... or a tape of mummy just making little noises.

Your link, Len, shows a series of chat rooms which have asked the question for school homework!! Not a wonderful research link!! Oh, and it was a *this is the nearest we can get to that url* type link, so isn't even close.

And for those interested.... the questions, and answers, are about having an abortion, and the ethical questions surrounding that.

This thread, and your *evidence* Len, is extremely subversive and underhand...

You are putting forward anti-abortionist propaganda, and don't even have the courage to openly admit to it... you just put up these posts alluding to it... without once saying what your purpose is... why you have found it interesting, why you think we would find it interesting.... you are not wanting to debate it, as you don't discuss, you just c & p and post it.

Personally... I find that creepy and offensive!!

Birdi, mine did too... it is the sounds and the timbre which are familiar, not the words, though, and that will include the ticking clock... have you ever noticed the way a newborn responds to being immersed into water (not fully, obviously, lol... but that has been done, safely, I think) it is the environment he/she is used to , so will almost always relax. They instinctively feel safe and comfortable. (personal observation, no scientific research)


Daff

I do wish people would tell me when they want my post deleted not run like children to GR

I said the latin is as stated by Janey and the utube is a pig waving good bye!!!!!

GR if you have a problem with my post do say coz if not please dont delet its a valed point to the conversation and upsets people when you do it

Yep, that is right, Len... this last one is an NHS generated information page.

Your previous ones weren't.... and I have done my research... you and I both know that they were not general information... but propoganda for a rather heinious variety of groups opposed to the abortion... no matter what the grounds... of a foetus... the groups who used this propoganda, use any means within their grasp to get their message across... and that includes destruction of property, attacks on nursing and medical staff, and various other. They are, and were, basically moralistic thugs and neo nazis.... who object to women having a choice when faced with a pregnancy that is difficult, where the foetus is severely damaged, where carrying a child to term might kill the mother, where the mother has been raped, violated, and resulted in a pregnancy... these people, whose spurious *research* you are spouting... they seek to deny those women the right to terminate the pregnancy......... Oh, and if anyone wishes me to prove it, I shall happily pm the links for them to find out for themself.

I was a woman in one of those situations..... I chose to take a huge risk and keep my baby, but it nearly killed me, and almost left my older child motherless. But I had a choice, and I made it. No-one.... but no-one, has the right to take that choice away from me, or other women........ and certainly not through violent means.

Now, I have exercised my right to object to what you have put up... and that includes being referred to as a member of a coven. I see that post has been deleted. Thank you.

Len, if you put such material on the net, then you must expect it to be challenged. Especially when you make claims about Research... and the research is no such thing at all!!

Daff