What Price For Kitty?

"Lesley Madigan" wrote in message
m...

They're running me ragged as usual. The depredations of Sammy are
chronicled at http://www.PossiblePlaces.com/Sammy.asp - but these are
anecdotes so might not be welcome here! ;



I looked at the site- Sammy is adorable beyond belief and the
anecdotes had me in fits of hysterical laughter! (As well as making me
remember when my two 21 months old kitties were kitties- mind you! I
suspect they still are)

Thanks Lesley! I know what you mean - Jessie, who turns 5 this year, is
still very much a kitten. Here's a movie of her chasing the red dot
greeble: http://www.possibleplaces.com/jessie_movie/

Hugs,

CatNipped

Lesley

Slave to the Fabulous Furballs

On 2005-02-18, Meghan Noecker penned:

In the meantime, i am severely against abortion, mainly because 2 states
wanted to abort my nephew - and he's a damn good kid. I can't imagine not
having him here.

Eh? The *state* wanted to abort your nephew? If it's not too personal, could
you explain what circumstances would prompt the govt to get involved here?

--
monique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully

pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca

On 2005-02-18, Meghan Noecker penned:
On 17 Feb 2005 08:23:31 -0800, "-L." wrote:

No, I choose to be childfree, and I also choose never to consider abortion,
therefore, I am not pro-choice.

Choosing never to consider abortion is not "not pro-choice." Plenty of
pro-choice people have that stance. They just don't try to dictate what
others do in that situation.


I choose abstinence til marriage, and will look at birth control options
then. While I hope never to deal with rape, I would have to go with adoption
if I got pregnant from that.

I just hope you wouldn't force others to do so. Me, if that happened I'd cut
my stomach out from the outside before carrying that child to term. I
couldn't deal with it.

What do you mean? The term "pro-choice" merely means reproductive freedom -
freedom to do anything that is a legal right WRT one's reproduction.

Yes, but it is championed be people who promote abortion, and it does NOT
include abstinence as a choice.

I completely disagree with this statement.

It is so focused on people having the right to do whatever the hell
they want, that it doesn't refer to responsibilities. Why don't we
teach teenagers to choose not to sleep around?

Because it doesn't work. We've been trying it for centuries. Sex ed
teachers are doing it right now. It doesn't WORK. Use me as an example
of someone for whom it doesn't work, if you'd like. I'd much rather
teach teenagers how to use condoms and make the Pill and other
contraceptive measures freely available via a doctor's checkup that the
parents don't have to know about. I'd rather see condoms available in
every bathroom and office in the school. Are condoms or even hormones 100%
effective? No, but they're MUCH more effective than the nothing that most
kids use when they're in the heat of the moment and don't have anything handy.

You can tell teenagers not to sleep around as much as you'd like, and a large
percentage will still do it. So while yes, abstinence is the only guaranteed
way of not having kids, I don't feel that advocating exclusive abstinence will
prevent teenage pregnancies. It just leads to brilliant solutions like "Well,
anal sex won't get me pregnant, so let's do that." Of course, that leaves the
kids even more vulnerable to STDs than does vaginal sex.

If we want to teach choice, we should be teaching these girls to make
good choices from the beginning, so they don't get stuck making harder
choices later.

I agree, but choice requires at least two options. Teaching kids that
abstinence is the only answer is *not* educating them or giving them choices
-- it's simply handing them the party line and hoping they'll toe it.

--
monique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully

pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca

On 2005-02-18, Meghan Noecker penned:

Well, horse bills can be in the thousands in one day. Like I said a colic
can easily be $5,000 or more. And once they colic, they are more likely to
do it again, and the insurance won't cover it again.

Also, many injuries cost more to diagnose, more to treat, and then have
expensive long term care. This is because the equipment needed to diagnose
them is more expensive (ie portable x-ray machine that is big enough to
x-ray a horse), and injuries often require stall rest, meaning the horse has
to be locked up for weeks or months on end, causing other problems. And they
can be very common injuries. Horse getting kicked by pasture mate, horse
running into a fence. horse slipping on ice, etc. A friend of mine had a
horse that freaked while learing to pull a cart. She tried to jump a gate
while attached to the cart. $5,000, fortuately covered by insurance. But it
also took 8 months to heal, and that leg was never covered by insurance.

Several years later, that same horse and one other horse, broke through a
fence, got into the grain and colicked. The vet was out there all day, and
both horses ended up being put down, it was just too much damage for the vet
to save them.

Suddenly, I'm very glad my parents never gave in to my demands for a horse.

I mean, I knew they were expensive, but I never really thought about the vet
aspect.

--
monique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully

pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca

On 2005-02-18, Meghan Noecker penned:
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 08:32:01 -0700, "Monique Y. Mudama"
wrote:

My complaints are piddling and ephemeral. Yours are direct and just plain
wrong.


Okay, what is wrong with expecting to be treated in a fair manner?

Sorry, poor word choice (again; I think I'm slipping). I meant that it is
wrong for your employer to treat you like this. I'm sorry you have to go
through it.

I know it's easy to suggest "getting another job," but I'm sure you've thought
through this and it's either not possible right now or there are reasons why
it wouldn't be a good idea.

Reading your post has made me realize just how good I have it at my job.

--
monique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully

pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca

Meghan Noecker wrote:

Most childfree people are pro-choice; just Google a.s.c and you will
see I am right. You may mean you are childless and pro-life.


No, I choose to be childfree, and I also choose never to consider
abortion, therefore, I am not pro-choice.

Fine. Whatever. But IME, you are a minority.


I choose abstinence til marriage, and will look at birth control
options then. While I hope never to deal with rape, I would have to
go
with adoption if I got pregnant from that.

As an adoptive Mom, I applaud you. I wish more people would choose the
gift of adoption.


What do you mean? The term "pro-choice" merely means reproductive
freedom - freedom to do anything that is a legal right WRT one's
reproduction.

Yes, but it is championed be people who promote abortion,

I don't know anyone who "promotes" abortion, and I have worked with the
National Abortion Rights Action League (US) since 1989 or so.

and it does
NOT include abstinence as a choice.

Those who support pro-choice stance merely try to protect the right to
govern your own choice to reproduce...or not. That's it. It has
nothing to do with *sex* per se.

Planned parenthood does educational seminars for teens and others which
includes the discussion of birth control including abstinence. No one
forces anyone to attend - it is all voluntary and free. It's an
excellent program, BTW.

It is so focused on people having
the right to do whatever the hell they want, that it doesn't refer to
responsibilities.

Why should it? I don't care if you have sex or not, with whom you have
sex, or sex at all. All I care about is protecting your right to do
whatever you want with regard to your *own* reproduction.


Why don't we teach teenagers to choose not to sleep
around?

Are you asking *me*? I will teach my son "not to sleep around" if and
when the time comes. I don't want anyone else teaching him one single
thing when it comes to morals and ethics. That's *my* job, not your's
or anyone else's.


If we want to teach choice,

I don't know anyone who "teaches choice" or who is forced to attend any
function that mentions "choice", for that matter.

we should be teaching these girls
to make good choices from the beginning, so they don't get stuck
making harder choices later.

I agree. But it is the parent's responsibility.

-L.

Meghan Noecker wrote:
On 18 Feb 2005 00:15:41 -0800, "-L." wrote:


Neither term has anything to do with one's stance on the choice
issue.
I merely stated that many (if not most) childfree people are
pro-choice.


But why do you believe that somebody is pro-choice jut because they
choose not to have children?

I don't. I said MANY or MOST. That's not everyone. Sheesh!

-L.

Monique Y. Mudama wrote:
snip



You can tell teenagers not to sleep around as much as you'd like, and
a large
percentage will still do it.

Just to keep this on-topic - it's like trying to teach two unneutered
cats not to "make" kittens. Not blinking likely!

-L.

Monique Y. Mudama wrote:
On 2005-02-18, Meghan Noecker penned:
On 17 Feb 2005 08:23:31 -0800, "-L." wrote:

No, I choose to be childfree, and I also choose never to consider
abortion,
therefore, I am not pro-choice.

Choosing never to consider abortion is not "not pro-choice." Plenty
of
pro-choice people have that stance. They just don't try to dictate
what
others do in that situation.

i think she was talking about her, personally, but yes - good point.

-L.

In article ,
(Meghan Noecker) wrote:

What do you mean? The term "pro-choice" merely means reproductive
freedom - freedom to do anything that is a legal right WRT one's
reproduction.

Yes, but it is championed be people who promote abortion, and it does
NOT include abstinence as a choice.

Say what? Of course it includes it. Choice means free choice.
Pro-choice means being opposed to mandatory abortion in China just as it
means being in support of those who chose abstinence and those who chose
birth control and those who choose abortion.

What part of "choice" don't you understand?

Priscilla
--
"And what's this crap about Sodomites? It's always Sodomites this and
Sodomites that. What about us Gomorrahians? We were there too; we
deserve some mention. Sodom always gets the credit, and Gomorrah always
does the work." - JohnN in alt.religion.christian.episcopal