Sex attack phone girls detained

Three girls who sexually assaulted a teenage boy during a three-and-a-half hour "happy slapping" ordeal have been given detention orders.

Further signs of the plunge:

The first World Outgames have ended in Montreal, where 12,000 lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) athletes came together for a celebration of sport, culture and human rights.

The motto of the games was "We play for real". For the organisers, they have been about fostering tolerance in sport to enable gay and lesbian athletes to compete openly, free from discrimination and exclusion.

Martina Navratilova said the Outgames were important to "let the heterosexual community know who we are and what we're all about". In Montreal it's certainly a case of "mission accomplished".

Now I do not have a problem with anyone in sport. I believe that what they stand for is wrong, as described by the word of God but this is no greaer than one who carries on an adulterous afair, or my sin even. They all are marks against Gods righteousness. My problem is with their flaunting it. What one does in private should remain private, but the homosexual activist community is desiring to push their privacy into our faces, looking for the recognition that can only come from the creator.

I want to bring out a few points before you get into this article and the issue. The ultimate question is really, is homosexuality approved of in the Bible, no, in the Old Testament (Hebrew) and New Testament. God is the same and does not change. Homosexuals can be believers and even cared for and loved by the church as any other person, but that does not mean we should in any fashion sanction there actions; so once the church identifies there sin they are bound to call them on there sin, as an adulterer would have to be reproved. Having that clear lets look at some of the quotes

"I am not an abomination before God - please, I beg you, let's say our prayers and stand up for right
Gene Robinson
Bishop of New Hampshire

He is not an abomination, this is true, but his lifestyle and what he teaches by his actions and words are.

Gene Robinson said the Episcopal Church should "stand up for right", adding that Anglicans should not be swayed by fear of deepening rifts over the issue.

Isn't it evident that all the parties are standing up for what they believe is right? But evidently some have different views of that "right".

Tom Wright, the Bishop of Durham in the UK, warned that a moratorium was needed on creating any bishops living with a same-sex partner until there was consensus in the church.

NT Wright is a well respected author and church man and obviously he is here trying to bring reconciliation, and on first glance it might appear that is what he is saying, but on second and ever after one has to bring to light the truth. He is saying the same as the Archbishop of Canterbury indicated a while back, when everyone comes around to the correct way of thinking than we will be able to accept homosexuals, until than maybe we should just work at picking apart the opposition.

The Homosexual action groups in large part are willing to play a battle of attrition waiting to wear down there opponents knowing that they will eventually win as society caves into a small vocal minority.

But it also recognises that gay people are "by baptism... full members of the Church" and apologises to them for years of rejection and maltreatment by the Church. Enough Said!!!!
In conclusion nothing new, but I think I will again re-evaluate NT Wright even more. In the past I thought he was just wrong about his views on modernism and post modernism, now I must suspect that his theology is completely askew.

Gay bishop 'not an abomination'

The gay US bishop at the centre of controversy over his consecration has told a convention of US Anglicans he is "not an abomination".
Gene Robinson said the Episcopal Church should "stand up for right", adding that Anglicans should not be swayed by fear of deepening rifts over the issue.
The Ohio convention is to vote on how far to go in seeking to prevent the ordination of more openly gay bishops.
A senior conservative said it would be impossible to prevent a split.
"We've reached a moment where it is very difficult, indeed I think we've reached an impossible moment, in holding it together," Bishop Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh said, quoted by the Associated Press.
'Faithfully true'
The Episcopal General Convention is the first since Bishop Robinson's consecration in 2003.
I am not an abomination before God - please, I beg you, let's say our prayers and stand up for right Gene Robinson Bishop of New Hampshire
Tom Wright, the Bishop of Durham in the UK, warned that a moratorium was needed on creating any bishops living with a same-sex partner until there was consensus in the church.
But in an impassioned speech, Bishop Robinson argued that the question was whether the church recognised the life of Christ in its gay and lesbian members.
It was not primarily about the future of the worldwide Anglican communion, he said.
"I am not an abomination before God," he said. "Please, I beg you, let's say our prayers and stand up for right."
He told the BBC that resolutions proposed by the convention were part of a conversation - one that he would not shy away from.
"I won't walk away. I will stay here and I will talk with anyone who is willing to talk. I will be as faithfully true as I can be with people who can be equally as faithful," he said.
'Express regret'
The main motion being discussed by the Episcopal Church suggests exercising "great caution" before ordaining another gay bishop, but falls short of the moratorium on ordination being suggested by Anglican leaders.
The motion also calls on dioceses to defer same-sex ceremonies until the Anglican communion achieves consensus on the issue.
And it says that the Episcopal Church should apologise "for having breached the bonds of affection in the Anglican communion by any failure to consult adequately with our Anglican partners".
It urges those who took part in Bishop Robinson's election to "express regret" for the pain they have caused.
But it also recognises that gay people are "by baptism... full members of the Church" and apologises to them for years of rejection and maltreatment by the Church.
The motion is mostly based on the recommendations of the Windsor Report, resulting from an inquiry into the row in 2004.
Story from BBC NEWS:


Published: 2006/06/15 09:49:36 GMT

© BBC MMVI

The Suprising Train Ride

Dutch alarmed by paedophile group BUT WHY?

A political party with a paedophile agenda has been registered in The Netherlands, prompting outrage among many parts of society.

The question thus remains why? Why are they supprised at the sittuation. They started the decline down the trail of secular huminism and must either go back or forward, there is no standing still. The train has left the station and must go. They might all be supprised where they get to, but the destination has been quite clear from the beginning of the journey. If Abortion or the killing of an innocent human being is justified as a human right than why should child abuse be outlawed. Rather as sex is for right for pleasure, and an abortion is neccessary to remove any untoward long term unhappiness and pleasure then Child abuse must be encouraged under this dictume. Of course this is a terrible travisty brought on to us by philosophers, but that is the price we must pay for our pleasure.

This really results from the teaching that what we have now is all there is and that there is nothing else, so live it to the full for tommorrow we die. God, or anything transendent is never in the picture, and so there is no basis for a moral code. In our hearts we all know that there is a basis for morality, so there must be something transcendent, God, but we fight against anything setting rules for us and want to do it our way. We can we can go to a Christless eternity, our way = HELL. And we seem to be doing a pretty good job at it.
#8000FF

Maybe the west should go to the war crimes court for the way we treat our children

dumping the next generation

• Foetuses 'cannot experience pain


• Hospital bars foetus photos man

I find it ironic that there seems so much interest in abortion. Now I know its pretty clear that from my other post I support a ban on abortion, because I believe that its not a foetus it is a Child. Now it is a sad society that disposes
of the next generation purely for there own self interest. Now some have labled yuppie generation as the "SELF" generation and if that is the case Generation X is the "Entertained" generation, and the next one will be the "Xtreme" generation.
All of these have led to generations that not only look value self above all else but disgard anything and everone who doesn't fit into its world. The party line is "everychild a wanted child" but what is really meant is "any child is a symbol of my self". While talking about valuing children, child abuse has exploded. Children have become disposable.
The most remarkable aspect of this whole article is no one would complain if he was sending hospital staff pictures of kidneys, hearts or livers. Now I do not agree with the sending these pictures to anyone other than lawmakers, maybe. They are sadening at disrespectful of the life that was taken, but I find it interesting the hipocrasy these organizations have, including the BBC who won't write anything that points out the hypocrasy.

The Articles
Hospital bars foetus photos man
UK Life League protest
The UK Life League campaigns against abortion
A 75-year-old man has been denied hip treatment after health officials warned him about sending hospital staff pictures of aborted foetuses.

Anti-abortion supporter Edward Atkinson has been jailed for 28 days for sending offensive photos to the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, King's Lynn, Norfolk.

The hospital said Atkinson had been banned from treatment for anything other than life-threatening conditions.

An anti-abortion group backing Atkinson said the decision was "outrageous".

James Dowson, national co-ordinator of the UK Life League, said: "It is ridiculous. I think it is completely unfair. They are refusing to treat him. Would they refuse a murderer or a paedophile?"

'Zero Tolerance' policy

Atkinson, of Ely Road, Hilgay, Norfolk, had been on a waiting list for an assessment for a hip operation when he started sending in pictures of aborted foetuses.

The NHS Trust wrote to him asking him not to send such material to the hospital as it was distressing staff.

When he continued, the trust said he had broken its "zero tolerance" policy with regards to staff.

On Monday, Ruth May, chief executive of the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, said in a statement: "The trust's view is that we have a duty of care to our staff.

Queen Elizabeth Hospital, King's Lynn
Atkinson sent the photos to the Queen Elizabeth Hospital

"Our legal advisers were consulted and their opinion was that this man's actions contravened the NHS Zero Tolerance policy in cases of abuse or unacceptable behaviour towards our staff.

"We take such matters extremely seriously and because he continued to send extremely graphic material to us we exercised our right to decline treatment to him for anything other than life-threatening conditions."

On Thursday at Swaffham Magistrates Court, Atkinson was convicted of three counts of sending offensive literature or material to staff at the hospital between January and April this year.

The literature, sent via the post, contained colour images of a dead foetus and the video, hand delivered, was of an abortion.

blind Science?... Evolution?

Does not there argument contradict evolution, or am I mistaken on this one. I eoulf noy lkr to propose that this is an argument against evolution, that would be rather strong, but I would like to say yet again that the arguments for evolution are not lock solid there actually very tenuous. These crabs have had many, many years and generations to evolve to the effect system, yet they have not. This is especially amazing as its not an isolated location, but prevalent.

Sinister secret of snail's escape or how Nature contradicts Evolution
By Richard Black Environment Correspondent, BBC News website


Right-handed flame box crabs find left-handedness hard to swallow
Snails with left-handed shells can have a big advantage in life - predators may find it impossible to eat them.
That is the conclusion of research just published in the Royal Society's journal Biology Letters.
Scientists from the US examined whelks and cone shells preyed on by the crab Calappa flammea.
They found the crab is unable to open left-handed shells because it only has a tool for peeling them on its right claw; so it discards them. "The crabs have a special tool on their claw, a tooth that's used like a can-opener," said Gregory Dietl from Yale University. "So, if you imagine trying to use a right-handed can-opener with your left hand - it's very hard to do," he told the BBC News website.

Old food
The fossil shells which Dr Dietl and colleagues used in their study date from between 1.5 and 2.5 million years ago. The scientists identified 11 whelks and cone shells which exist, or existed, in both right- and left-handed forms. "The best way to visualise it is to imagine you have the shell in your hand with the pointed end upwards and the opening towards you," said Dr Dietl. "If the opening is on the right-hand side, it's a right-handed shell or a dextral shell; if it's on the left, it's left-handed or sinistral." Many bear the scars of attempted evisceration by crab. Ten out of the 11 pairs showed higher rates of scars on dextral shells, suggesting that crabs are attacking them in preference to their left-handed counterparts.
If you assume that left-handed and right-handed whelks and cone shells would be equally tasty, something else must be causing the crabs to prefer those of one orientation. In the behaviour of C. flammea, more commonly known in North American waters as the flame box crab, researchers found a clue.

Sinister difficulties
Typically a crab grasps a shell with the pointed end away from its body. With a dextral shell, this means the opening is on the right, and the special "tooth" on its claw can break in. But with a sinistral shell, either the opening is on the left, or it has to grasp the pointed end towards its body. Both solutions are apparently too much trouble; the crab acts like a vegetarian in a butcher's shop, and moves on. "They picked them up, and they just dropped them," said Dr Dietl. "If we left them for a long period of time they would probably figure it out; but in nature these left-handed shells are really rare." The evolutionary question is why these left-handed forms have remained so rare - some have even gone extinct - if they escape death by crab more easily.

Being left-handed may benefit cricketers like Andrew Strauss
In humans, left-handers make up about 10-13% of the population; but in some competitive situations including such sports as tennis, cricket and boxing, they are much more prevalent and dominant than that figure would suggest. At the last cricket World Cup, left-handed batsmen scored more runs, batted for longer and were more likely to bat in the top of the order than right-handers. It is the relative rarity of left-handed batsmen which seems to confer advantage. One theory holds that right-handed bowlers struggle against them because they do not face them that often; if they did, they would learn how to get them out quicker.
Presumably if left-handed marine snails became more common, crabs would eventually evolve apparatus or techniques for eating them, and their advantage would disappear. But that cannot explain why in some populations they persist only in extremely low proportions, about 1%, or why in others they have gone extinct; other factors must be at play.
Sinistral snails apparently find it much harder to find a mate, and so may be doomed to remain rare or die out completely, whether or not they evade can-opening crabs.

Medical Ethics

Dr Vivienne Nathanson, head of ethics at the British Medical Association, said: "For doctors, the decisions are extraordinarily difficult because they have to have at the centre of their sights the child and the welfare of the child, and not putting the child through a burdensome treatment where there is no hope of any future improvement."

The premise is that there is an acceptable normal life that is standardized around the world and anything less than this is not worth living. Because this child seems to be at the bottom of the scale than it is proper to dispose of it. Is that the right way to be thinking though? This child is not my dog?
They talk as though it is in the childs best interest, throughout History people have used the same language.

"every child a wanted child"
"Abortion will stop child abuse"

These are commonly bantered about and yet I have never heard of more child abuse in our country than what we have now. We treat children worse now than most slaves of the past centuries. Slavery was dispicable, and so is the way we treat our children.
The ironic thing about this, this child is wanted and the institution that should be protecting him is trying to off him. I think that ethically these physicians need to be let go, as they are trying to be ethicist as well.

When did a doctor become an Ethicist?

Baby MB, who cannot be named, has spinal muscular atrophy - a genetic condition which leads to almost total paralysis - and cannot breathe unaided.
His family are fighting a hospital's bid for permission to withdraw ventilation from the 17-month-old.
Doctors say it would be better to let him die as his life is "intolerable".
But the child's father told the court he did not think it was right for anyone to decide if the baby should live or die.
He said: "As a Muslim I believe that no one knows exactly when people will die.
"It was God who gave us life and God will take it whatever the situation, good condition, sad, or whatever your condition.
"You've got a certain time to die - that's what I believe."
Counsel for the hospital Huw Lloyd cross-examining said if it was not for modern technology and ventilator support his son would be dead.
….. She argued if he was given an operation which might allow him to breathe alone - a tracheotomy - his life would improve.
…And while he is not believed to be mentally impaired, he can only move his eyebrows. ……
Medics from the hospital caring for him have told the court they believe the invasive ventilation method they use to keep him alive caused him discomfort.
One unnamed doctor said he believed Baby MB had an "intolerable life", and that he was troubled by the life-sustaining treatment he had been obliged to give to the child for some time.

I find it amazing that a doctor who is trained to save lives is suggesting the killing of one. They might rationalize this on many accounts yet in the end it is a rational that is driving it, suggesting that the doctors can determine what is intolerable. Less than a hundred years ago this child would have died long ago, but it is possible that in less than 20 years from now it could be broken free from its body that is paralyzed, but if they kill the child they might never know. Ultimately in all circumstances like this it is the responsibility of the parents to care for the child, not the courts. There is clearly no child endangerment from the parent's side.
As always in cases like this one has to ask them one question, "is this driven by the trust to cut costs?" I wonder?

Free Will

Free will I have often heard of, but I have never seen it. I have met with will... But has either been led captive by sin or held in blessed bonds of grace." C.H. Spurgeon TABLETALK January 2000

No doctrine in the whole word of God has excited the hatred of mankind more than that truth of the absolute sovereignty of God. ? C.H. Spurgeon TABLETALK January 2000

Where a god who is totally purposive and totally foreseeingacts upon a nature which is totally interlocked, there can be no accidents or loose ends, nothing whatever of which we can safely use the word "merely." Nothing is "merely a byof anything else. C.S. Lewis; TableTalk January 2000

CH Spurgeon; Election, Evangelical Press
"The Bible must be first and God=s minister must lie underneah it. We must not stand on the Bible to preach, but we must preach with the Bible above our heads. After all we have preached, we are well aware that the mountain of truth is higher than our eyes can discern; clouds and darkness are round about it summit, and we can not discern its topmost pinnacle; yet we will try to preach it as well as we can. But since we are mortal and liable to err, exercise your jugement, Atry the spirites whether they are of God;" and if on mature reflection on your bended knees, you are led to disregard election a thing which I consider to be utterly impossible B then forsake it, do not hear it preached, but believe and confess whatever you see to be God's word. I can say no more than that by way of exodium."


"AAh, but say some, 'I thought it meant that God elected some to heaven and some to hell.' that is a very different matter from the gospel doctrine. he has elected men to holiness and to righteousness, and through that to heaven. You must not say that he has elected them simply to heaven, and others only to hell. He has elected you to be saved. If any of you desire to have salvation, you are elected to have it, if you desire it sincerely and earnestly. But, if yu don=t desire it, why on earth should you be so preposterously foolish as to grumble because God gives that which you do not like to other people?"

How about just a little Honisty

In dealing with a broker-recommending mortgage on whether to disclose the best offer for the customer or the agent. Is it best to tell the buyer the best one available for them or is it best to tell the one from which the agent makes the most. The name has now in some instances become introducer rather than advisor so that people assuage there guilt about telling something that they may know or at least suspect is less than the best product for the client.

"...if the best product available is recommended, then that client, via his or own research, will endorse the introducer=s recommendation and not only come back and do the deal but also have the confidence to bring his or her friends along as well. I am, therefore, convinced that a policy of putting the customer first, even if that means a low (or even nonexistent) procreation fee is the right strategy..."

Stephen Knight- Executive chairmen Private Label Mortgage Services; Money Marketing

Violence Intersects Lives of Promise (washingtonpost.com)

Any time that it becomes common in society to destroy that which is beautiful, and it to be overlooked the society will self destruct. There can be nothing more beautiful than a woman who is bearing a child or has recently. This is Gods work in action to kill and injure the mother is a direct attack on the God of Heaven.

The hard facts of disposable Children and people

One of Twin Babies Awaiting Heart Transplant Receives Donor Organ; Infant Was Listed in Critical Condition at Mattel Childrens Hospital at UCLA

Nick Draper, who with his identical twin brother Nate had been awaiting a heart transplant since their birth seven months ago, received a donor heart today during a five-hour surgery at Mattel Children's Hospital at UCLA.

Nick was listed in critical condition at 4 p.m. PST on Feb. 16 in the intensive care unit. His new heart was being supported by a miniature heart-and-lung machine called extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO).

"We deeply appreciate all of the good wishes we have received during the past seven months," said Nicole and Michael Draper, the twins' parents. "It's a comfort knowing that our children are in the prayers of so many people."

Nate remains on the waiting list for a donor organ at Mattel Children's Hospital at UCLA. His brother received a new heart first because his name was added to the waiting list earlier. Medical complications prevented Nate from being listed until two weeks later.

Born July 11, 2005, in Phoenix, Ariz., Nick and Nate suffer from dilated cardiomyopathy, a condition in which the heart muscle is too weak to pump efficiently. Doctors say the condition is very rare in newborns and extremely unusual in twin infants.

-UCLA-

Recently it seems that the abortion debate has risen its head yet again, if it had ever disappeared. I ran across these captivating articles about the draper children. I thought it brought up some of the salient points.
The UCLA article is very matter of the fact and to the point while the LA Times article puts a face on the situation. There are many out there in the abortion debate as a matter of blindness who wont recognize that the un-born child is a child, but some recognize it and deny its importance, as the will of the mother is more important than that of the child. This will cause enormous problems from now on, and has very strong relationships to Hitlers Germany, who said for the convenience of the majority the minority need to be exterminated.
We need to have patience with those who blindly don't recognize the baby as a child, and point out the arrogance and hate of those who will choose the mothers rights over the rights of the child. The mother generally had a right to sex or not, but even when she did not does that make it right to destroy someone who had no choice in the decision at all.

Twin's Transplant Hits Trouble
New heart fails to beat properly, so it is hooked up to a machine. Doctors are unsure what the problem is. Parents stay hopeful.
By Kurt Streeter, Times Staff Writer
February 17 2006

Nick Draper, a 7-month-old twin whose struggle to beat a fatal heart condition has been the focus of a series of Times articles, was in critical condition Thursday after undergoing transplant surgery at UCLA Medical Center, hospital officials said.

During an arduous, nearly seven-hour operation that started when he was anesthetized at 3:30 a.m., surgeons opened up Nick's chest, took out his heart and replaced it with a donor heart that the doctors assumed would work efficiently right away.

Instead, Dr. Mark Plunkett, surgical director of UCLA's pediatric transplant program, implanted the new organ and then watched as it failed to beat strongly enough to keep Nick alive on its own. Concerned that the boy's bodymight be rejecting the new organ, Plunkett connected the heart to a machine that should temporarily make it beat efficiently.

"We can't be sure what's going on right now," the doctor said. "Right now we're going to provide the power, we're going to give his heart a rest. His heart doesn't have to do the work."

Plunkett added that the sophisticated machine can help keep Nick's new heart beating for more than a month but not much longer. The original heart is now unusable.

Over the next two to three days, Plunkett said, his team will probably be able to figure out what is going wrong.

Nick's body might be rejecting the new organ.The heart could also simply be warming up, taking a while to beat the way it should because it took an unusually long time, about seven hours, to transport the organ from its donor to UCLA. Citing confidentiality laws, transplant officials did not provide details such as the donor's age, gender and hometown or how the donor died.

The options for Nick appear limited. The gray-eyed baby, who has never lived outside a hospital, could get better soon if his heart starts working properly, either on its own or with new doses of medicine. Doctors might put him back on the heart transplant list. If he doesn't improve, he would need a new organ within the next several weeks or he would probably die.

The unexpected struggle Thursday was another blow for Nick's parents, Michael and Nicole Draper, who have battled since July to keep their twins alive. Soon after the boys were born in Phoenix, where the family lives, the twins were diagnosed with dilated cardiomyopathy, a rare condition that caused their hearts to swell and barely pump. The twins were so close to dying that they were airlifted to UCLA Medical Center, known for its heart care and transplant program.

The Drapers followed Nick and Nate to Los Angeles, bringing along their three other children. The family lived for months in a $15-a-night, one-bedroom apartment at Hollywood's Ronald McDonald House, an hour's drive in traffic from UCLA. After a recent story in The Times focused on the family's plight, the Drapers moved to Tiverton House, a hotel across the street from the hospital that offered them two rooms at cut rates.

All along, they believed that their boys would live, if they could just get transplants. Nick received a heart first because he was put on the transplant list ahead of his brother. At the time of their birth, Nick's health was better than Nate's.

In the hours before Thursday's surgery, the Drapers felt sure that they were soon to clear at least one hurdle. Both parents knew the risks, but hours before the operation they noted how they were confident because of their strong Mormon faith and because of statistics: About 95% of infant heart transplant operations are initially successful.

But then the surgery dragged on, an hour and then two hours longer than they had expected. Kept from the operating room by hospital rules, they stayed with Nate in the third-floor room he has long shared with Nick. They struggled through the morning as they received updates from doctors and nurses that the surgery was not going well. At one point, hit with thefact that Nick might not make it, they rushed from the hospital for fresh air and to clear their thoughts.

In midafternoon their son out of surgery but in critical condition in the intensive care unit the Drapers sat in the third-floor room. Nicole, 32, held Nate, who still needs a new heart. She was numb, but spoke of their journey.

"From the moment they were born, we've been faced with the unthinkable, with the prospect of them not making it," she said. "Then, today, it seemed like there was finallysome light at the end of the tunnel. We were feeling great. These operations are usually a sure thing.... And we get this fluke."

Yet she remained optimistic. They both were. Michael, 33, interrupted, finishing her thought.

"Dr. Plunkett said there are still things that can be done," he said. "And Dr. Plunkett came in here after the operation and said, 'We are not dead in the water.' Well, we take that to be very encouraging. We figure, why not? There's no reason why Nick can't make it. No reason."

Clinton Appointee Janet Reno's view of Christians

This might be old but as Mrs Clinton is still running for office it has a perspective
"A Cultist is one who has a strong belief in the Bible and second coming of Christ; who frequently attends bible studies who has a high level of financial giving to a Christian cause; who home schools their children; who has accumulated survival foods and has a strong belie in the second amendment; and who distrusts big government. Any of these may qualify (a person as a cultist] but certainly more than one [of these] would cause us to look at this person as a threat, and his family as being in a risk situation that qualified for government interference."

Attorney General Janet Reno, Interview on 60 minutes, June 26, 1994

Sex: How? Why? What? The Teenagers Guide

Author: Jane Goldman
Date: 1996
Source: Sex: How? Why? What? The Teenagers Guide
Publisher: Penguin Books
City: London

Subjects:
Pg 37C I think about sex all the time?
You bet! You see, the homones that cause all the physical changes in your body during puberty don=t just make you sprout hairs and suchlike. They also get working on your brain  YQuite apart from that, sex is jolly interesting, and thinking about it can be a very nice, exciting thing to do with your spare time! Even if you can believe that you=re perfectly healthy and normal, thinking about sex all the time can still make you feel uneasy, because you can feel that you=relosing cotrol of your brain.

Subjects: fantasy
Pg 39C I often imagine having sex whith people I know, or famous people. I really enjoy it. Is it okay?
Its called fanasising. It=s more than okay, and nearly everybody does it at some time in their life. It=s just like daydreaming, only its main purpose is to make you feel excited in a sexual way.
Y Fantasising is a fantastically healthy way to discover more about your own sexual feelings, so you should never feel guilty about doing it.

Subjects: intolerance, masturbation(on)
Pg 51C others with strong religious beliefs that sex and the sexual organs only existed in order for married people to make babies, and that using the genitals for any kind of sexual pleasure B especially outside of marriage B was Asinful@. There are still people about who think the same way. Of course, everyone is entitled to their won beliefs, but people also have a right to know the truth. Facts are facts, and the plain truth is that masturbations is not harmful.

Subjects:
Pg 59C Some parentes have very strong views that young people shouldn=t have sex at all, or that sex should be saved for marriage. Changing their minds is likely to be impossible. In cases like this, you=re best off keeping some things secret, but that doesn=t mean you should sneak around and go against what they say.

Subjects: Sex, underage, Love, Promiscuity, children, teenage,
Pg 78&9C If you=re considering taking a relationship furtherC i.e. Having sexB not just for the first time but any time, you should always ask yourself these questions

• Do I really like, fancy, care about or maybe even love my prospective partner?


• Do they like fancey, care about or maybe even love me, too?


• If I don=t feel like I want to have sex now, would my partner be prepared to wait until I do?


• Am I certain that my parter is okay about us using a condom?


• Have I or my partner got a condom already, or is one of us prepared to go out and buy some before we decide to have sex?

Subjects: immediate, future, sex, children, fulfillment
Pg 81C What if I don=t get a chance to think carefully before I have sex?

That happens. You might be in a very intimate situation - alone with someone, having a passionate snogging and petting session and suddenly you realise that you=re on the verge of losing your virginity. In these cases, you just have to go withyour gut instinct B do you really want to do it? Not because all your friends have, not because you=re scared of losing your partner, not because you figure you Amight as well@ now you=re this close to it, nor because your worried about being a Atease@ if you back out, but because you really, really want to experience sex and closeness with this person, right now? If the answere is a definite yes, then as long as one of you has a condom ready to use, there=s no reason why you shouldn=t go ahead.

Subjects:
Pg 164C Sex for sex=s sake can be wonderful between two people who think the same way.

Justice

Some might think that this is a great thing, which surely it is the problem is that this all to common a state and he might be released back to the public. Something is screwed up when this individual has a chance to walk again outside of a prison wall when clearly he could care less about any individual.

He said there was forensic and eyewitness evidence against the defendant
adding: "Nelson blames almost everyone and almost everything for his predicament
...but if you convict Nelson, as we invite you to do, he will have no-one to
blame but himself."
On 17 February the jury found him guilty of both
murders.
He faces another two life sentences and could be given a natural
life tariff by the home secretary, meaning he would never be released from jail.

The Problem results with people who say, " he really didn't have a good
childhood." I guess this really means he is not really guilty of shooting anyone. He and everyone else who kill and maim in this manner are guilty, and need to be removed from the chance of perpetrating this and leading others down the same road. Maybe that means a prison for life sentece people as well. At the bottom of a mine might be a good choice.

an Icon of our age has now come to meet the maker

Betty Friedan Dies - Founder of Now Dies - Now from the BBC
Betty Friedan from The Tribune

After reading the short biographies of Betty Friedan I am continually saddened. I had always viewed her as an eggresive anti male but it would appear as though she was more for moderation. Not complete and I am sure the articles are not completely accurate yet it would appear that she might have slowed down the completely anti male milatency prevelant in the Womens Liberation Movement, which was also anti christian values camp.
These organizations might have lost steam, but thats only because the message preached has now converted the quire to a large extent. The real problem is there was a small problem in the 50's. Rather than fix the small problem though they would rather start over, the problem is ths tends to push you in the complete other direction and so now we have the complete utter destruction of society. Thats ok some of the earlier feminist wanted that so that they could recreate it in the demented image. It has to happen and many peoples lives are destroyed in the process but we know that Christ and His kingdom will reign eternally.

---

Devalued children are the largest sign and the biggest loosers

A

A wanted child Parents' joy as Charlotte goes home

a Confused one Damages claim for abortion twin

The bottom of the Barrel Entombed baby's parents revealed