Breaking News Events

[genghisfawn]

So our Public Safety Minister, Vic Toews (also one of those Tories in favour of scrapping the long-gun registry) tabled Bill C-30 earlier this week. Essentially it would give government agencies and law enforcement to tap people's internet and telecommunications without a warrant, which would maybe catch 1% of the bad guys and annoy 99% of everyone else.

What say you? Wouldn't that just... ugh, annoy you?

#TellVicEverything is taking flight on Twitter, and because I don't have Twitter, I e-mailed Mr Toews all about my day, what I plan to do with the rest of it and what sites I visited online.

http://www.globalnews.ca/tell+vic+toews/6442582391/story.html

A little bit of navel-gazing is fun now and then, and I flatter myself to think that some things I said may quirk that snowy-white 'stache of his into a little smile. My day has been good. I hope his is, as well, and that his inbox doesn't fill up too fast.

[Cin]

Originally Posted by Kobi

I understand the new laws being proposed and enacted are designed by those pro-life people looking for ways to undermine a woman's right to an abortion. I understand their mind set is something along the lines of ....if only women saw the fetus as a living thing, they would change their minds. And an ultrasound, whether abdominal or transvaginal, is their feeble attempt to do this.

I also understand these idiotic requirements are meant to make the process more cumbersome and distasteful for both the woman seeking an abortion and the person providing the service.

The laws are meant and written to make an ultrasound as a required prerequisite for an abortion. They require not only the test but a visual and verbal description of the results. They require one to have the test in order to proceed with the procedure. If one doesnt consent to the requirements to have the procedure, the procedure, technically, would not be legally able to be performed.

I find it reprehensible for someone to use the law and the health care system to impose their morality and religious beliefs on another. It is one thing to have tests required prior to a procedure as a safety/precaution measure, and quite another to have them required as a morality check.

On the other hand, I also find it disturbing to see people call this "legal rape by a health care professional". It might be the word "rape" that is bothering me. Rape, to me, is a violent act of power. In this context, it brings up visions of women being tied down to gurneys while a transvaginal probe is being forcibly inserted into them. This vision stirs up the emotions but it is not what any law I have read says or implies.

To me, the laws have removed the woman's right to opt out of an ultrasound and the related explanations. It is saying, in order to do this procedure, this is what we are required to do by law. If you agree, we can proceed. If you do not, we cannot.

This is not the same as "legalizing rape by a health care professional". Nor is it the same as saying women do not have to consent. Doing any procedure for any reason without consent is assault and battery.

The Virginia law requires: a doctor to determine the gestational age and listen for a heartbeat. Not a heck of a lot of ways to do this and still be compliant with the law. The Virginia law also seeks to legislate a fertilized egg as a personhood with rights. Thats an entirely different matter.

As reprehensible as these laws may be, it is imperative, I think, to maintain a level head in the entire matter. These constant, repetitve legislative abuses to "legalize" their version of morality, whether it be in reproductive rights or gay marriage or anything else, are increasing at an alarming rate in the strangest of ways. It needs to be dealt with.

Do we have any info on what is being done to challenge these abuses of legislative power?

Well, yes, I see what you are saying. As of yet, the law does not require that a woman be tied down and vaginally probed. So it is not rape. But saying she has a choice is somewhat illusionary. To me the lack of a real option makes it an emotionally violent act of power against a woman by her government.

Realistically speaking the choice has been removed. Yes, a woman can opt out but it is not as simple as saying a woman really has a choice. It’s not like making a decision to have an abortion is something so frivolous and inconsequential that a woman will just decide against it because the law has made it too emotionally traumatic to go through with. It’s not like she’s going to say “oh well if I have to have a vaginal ultrasound accompanied by a visual and verbal description of the fetus forget it. The reasons I chose to go through with this procedure are so trivial that I’ll just give birth instead.” That is a highly unlikely scenario. So really there is no choice. Just more emotional pain during an already difficult time. Not to mention the extra financial burden.

That said I really do agree that we need to keep a level head and focus on the constant and repetitive attacks against individual freedoms that are being consistently perpetrated. A woman’s right to control her own body has been under heavy attack for several years now. The passing of the law in Virginia did not happen in a vacuum. The climate has been carefully cultivated as state after state has passed laws restricting abortion. The ultimate goal is clear.

[DapperButch]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...6pLid%3D136368

I am starting to think that colleges and universities should start requiring psychological testing for all students applying for admission to an education program.

[Okiebug61]

Originally Posted by DapperButch

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...6pLid%3D136368

I am starting to think that colleges and universities should start requiring psychological testing for all students applying for admission to an education program.

I take offense to you generalizing all teachers with your headline

What's WRONG with Teachers nowadays.

My partner is a teacher and a damn fine one. I personally think you owe teachers an apology.

[Corkey]

The use of all is in reference to students, not teachers.

[Greyson]

Originally Posted by DapperButch

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...6pLid%3D136368

I am starting to think that colleges and universities should start requiring psychological testing for all students applying for admission to an education program.

Dapper, did you mean to say teachers? Or, maybe you did mean students, and teachers? I personally don't think you were attempting to disparage all teachers by suggessting psychological testing. I think any profession that works with children, under 18 should be psychologically evaluated every few years.

This would not be exclusive to teachers. It could also include counselors, coaches, childcare. Maybe I am putting to much stock in psychological evaluation. It does seem that with the advent of the internet and supporting technology the public in general is made aware of so many of the crimes committed against kids.

[Okiebug61]

Originally Posted by Corkey

The use of all is in reference to students, not teachers.

I am starting to think that colleges and universities should start requiring psychological testing for all students applying for admission to an education program.
__________________
-Dapper

No it's about educators.

[Corkey]

Originally Posted by Okiebug61

I am starting to think that colleges and universities should start requiring psychological testing for all students applying for admission to an education program.
__________________
-Dapper

No it's about educators.

What is your point? Students will become teachers? Lets start at students and then we won't have to worry so much about teachers. I think every teacher should be vetted, and find nothing offensive in that statement. I prefer children not be subjected to teachers who would abuse them.

[Okiebug61]

I'm going to make one final statement and then I'm leaving this thread.

I am totally pissed off that anyone would suggest there needs to be any psychological testing for teachers or any other profession.

Do you all not recall how horrible it was for our community when we were considered to be crazy my the medical profession.

I'm done. I'm pissed and I am totally hurt that anyone in this community would dare to suggest something of this nature.

[Kobi]

Originally Posted by Miss Tick

Well, yes, I see what you are saying. As of yet, the law does not require that a woman be tied down and vaginally probed. So it is not rape. But saying she has a choice is somewhat illusionary. To me the lack of a real option makes it an emotionally violent act of power against a woman by her government.

Realistically speaking the choice has been removed. Yes, a woman can opt out but it is not as simple as saying a woman really has a choice. It’s not like making a decision to have an abortion is something so frivolous and inconsequential that a woman will just decide against it because the law has made it too emotionally traumatic to go through with. It’s not like she’s going to say “oh well if I have to have a vaginal ultrasound accompanied by a visual and verbal description of the fetus forget it. The reasons I chose to go through with this procedure are so trivial that I’ll just give birth instead.” That is a highly unlikely scenario. So really there is no choice. Just more emotional pain during an already difficult time. Not to mention the extra financial burden.

That said I really do agree that we need to keep a level head and focus on the constant and repetitive attacks against individual freedoms that are being consistently perpetrated. A woman’s right to control her own body has been under heavy attack for several years now. The passing of the law in Virginia did not happen in a vacuum. The climate has been carefully cultivated as state after state has passed laws restricting abortion. The ultimate goal is clear.

Tick, we actually agree here in all aspects. The exception may be in how we are each using the word "choice".

The object of these types of legistative abuses, seeing they cannot outright ban abortions, is to make the process of getting one more complicated, more expensive, more traumatic, more cumbersome. The agenda is very clear, the methodology is very sneaky and repulsive, the logic is just irrational.

Having said that, however, I am waiting for the next step. If this follows a reasonable course, within their warped mental processes, it stands to reason women might next be facing something like..... aborted fetuses will no longer consider "medical waste". I apologize for the insensitivity of that statement but it is a viable reality. It would then follow that women could then be required to bury the fetus. It sucks, but there is a game plan here that needs to be acknowledged and addressed.

Back to choice. It might be a semantics thing. If I were to have any type surgery tomorrow, at my age, I would be required to have an ekg and blood work as a minimum before the procedure. If I refused to have it done, the procedure would be cancelled. That is the process. One could say, I should have the choice but I dont. If I want the procedure, this is the crap that goes along with it. It is, unfortunately, a take it or leave it proposition.

Requiring a transvaginal ultrasound is no different but you have to take the emotion out of it. The procedure is still available but to get it, here are the hoops you have to jump through. It stinks, it sucks, but we seldom get to choose the process in anything.

I am less concerned with "choice" per se than I am with the "game plan" of whomever is behind this growing need to spur unevolvement in this country. That game plan is becoming more and more dangerous to women. I really think we need to keep our eye on the forest and not so much on the individual trees.

I dont know the answer here but coming from the age of social movments, I find it very concerning that we have a lot of media reports showing how our freedoms are being usurped but very little on how we are fighting back. Why is that?

[Corkey]

Wow, as a law enforcement officer I was subjected to vetting and tons of psychological testing, I know of lots of other professions this is done as well. I fail to see the offense. With the news of teachers molesting students, of forcing students to participate in nefarious situations I would think you would have the children's best interests in mind instead of being offended. My bad.

[Greyson]

Originally Posted by Okiebug61

I'm going to make one final statement and then I'm leaving this thread.

I am totally pissed off that anyone would suggest there needs to be any psychological testing for teachers or any other profession.

Do you all not recall how horrible it was for our community when we were considered to be crazy my the medical profession.

I'm done. I'm pissed and I am totally hurt that anyone in this community would dare to suggest something of this nature.

I am sorry you took it personally. I am open to suggesstions as to how we start weeding out the people in any profession that may not be fit, safe to work with or around children. I do know I can read daily about children being abused physcially, mentally, emotionally by clergy, teachers, parents, other kids the list seems endless.

As for the LGBTQ marked as crazy by the medical profession, I remember, yes. I don't think being LGBTQ makes one crazy. You may be crazy but it is not a given because you are LGBTQ.

[UofMfan]

From MoveOn.org

Today, an all male ‘witness’ panel was allowed to speak at the GOP’s hearing examining the Obama administration’s new regulation requiring employers and insurers to provide contraception coverage to employees. When Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke was presented to testify on behalf of the Minority, she was shown the door. She would have been the only female voice speaking on behalf of the millions of women who support access to birth control. Here is the basis of her testimony, had she been allowed to speak.

[DapperButch]

Originally Posted by Okiebug61

I'm going to make one final statement and then I'm leaving this thread.

I am totally pissed off that anyone would suggest there needs to be any psychological testing for teachers or any other profession.

Do you all not recall how horrible it was for our community when we were considered to be crazy my the medical profession.

I'm done. I'm pissed and I am totally hurt that anyone in this community would dare to suggest something of this nature.

Okie,

I am sorry if you found it offensive. I guess you really thought I was serious, rather than it just me throwing out some frustration of the seemingly constant poor choices teachers have been making lately?

I actually don't think that all students should have to do psychological testing prior to admission to an education major. Plus, most education majors come into freshman year already in the major, so it would be at their own expense as high school seniors to get tested. Obviously, we would have a much lower rate of students applying, which would not be a good thing.

I personally am a therapist (licensed clinical social worker), and I would welcome any kind of testing for admission to a graduate program. However, I do think that the professors do a pretty good job at weeding out the people with obvious personality disorders and such. They just discharge them from the program.

Also, I support the idea of all social workers (and all other therapists) having to pay for psychological testing after graduation in order to receive their license. That is actually an excellent idea (thanks, Greyson)! I would put out some money to ensure that there are only good, mentally healthy therapists working with both children and adults.

[DapperButch]

Originally Posted by Greyson

I think any profession that works with children, under 18 should be psychologically evaluated every few years.

All you really need is one psychological evaluation to see if someone fits the characteristics of someone who would not be the best influence on children. Repetition wouldn't make a difference.

Since I am not a psychologist (only psychologists can do psychological testing), I can not say this with authority, but I do not think that there is any psychological testing that would weed out pedophilia.

[Greyson]

Originally Posted by DapperButch

All you really need is one psychological evaluation to see if someone fits the characteristics of someone who would not be the best influence on children. Repetition wouldn't make a difference.

Since I am not a psychologist (only psychologists can do psychological testing), I can not say this with authority, but I do not think that there is any psychological testing that would weed out pedophilia.

I am not a psychologist either. Not even close. Urban Planner does not make me an expert in this field. As far as repetition, I thought every few years may help because sometimes it does seem like people can become troubled a few years later. I don't think blanced mental health is a given for a life time.

I do appreciate your participation in the threads Dapper. For the most part, I have found you to be fair minded and informed. I also can understand the reaction of OkieBug and I also know too many childrend are being harmed daily in "plain sight." Anyway, I have said my thoughts on this one.

[DapperButch]

Originally Posted by DapperButch

All you really need is one psychological evaluation to see if someone fits the characteristics of someone who would not be the best influence on children. Repetition wouldn't make a difference.

Originally Posted by Greyson

I am not a psychologist either. Not even close. Urban Planner does not make me an expert in this field. As far as repetition, I thought every few years may help because sometimes it does seem like people can become troubled a few years later. I don't think blanced mental health is a given for a life time.

Absolutely. I wasn't referring to shifting mental health disorders (like mood disorders, for example), I was referring specifically to what I highlighted above. I am referring to people who would have extremely poor judgement, antisocial traits, etc., that could effect them making good choices for children. For example, the person in the article has the children write to her boyfriend who is an inmate in prison who had child porn and weapons charges on him. That shows very poor judgement. I would suggest that if she continued as a teacher, she would continue to make poor choices such as the above. This is about "who" she is as a person.

I am not referring to things like depression, for example, which could change year to year. Having a teacher who is depressed isn't harmful to children.

Make sense?

Corkey, brought up a good example of a profession that does psychological testing for this purpose. Police officers. They test for things like antisocial traits. People who are mildly-severely socialpathic apply to become police officers. They like to feel they have power over others (not such a good trait for a police officer who already is handed a lot of power). Police officers also need to be able to control their anger and have good judgement. They screen for these things and then recommend whether or not the police department should consider hiring the person. If the person had depression, for example, the psychologist may recommend treatment to the person, but it wouldn't preclude them from being a good police officer.

[Toughy]

EXCUSE ME................

inserting any object in the vagina or anus of a women without her consent IS RAPE. PERIOD.

inserting any object in a vagina under coercion (which is what requiring it to get an abortion) IS RAPE

to suggest otherwise is utter bullshit and smacks of the patriarchy.....

and I'm outta here or I will get timed out again.......

[Nat]

Originally Posted by Toughy

EXCUSE ME................

inserting any object in the vagina or anus of a women without her consent IS RAPE. PERIOD.

inserting any object in a vagina under coercion (which is what requiring it to get an abortion) IS RAPE

to suggest otherwise is utter bullshit and smacks of the patriarchy.....

I agree. I had to have one of these ultrasounds back in 2004 and felt incredibly violated by the process, even though I knew it was medically necessary. For a government to force/coerce women to be vaginally probed with a phallic ultrasound wand for no reasonable medical purpose is government-mandated sexual assault.

[Corkey]

I can't with good conscious say it is anything more than state sanctioned rape. This is what happens when men are in charge of women's health issues, and That needs to change.