here we go again...

[bae]

I would expect a farmer to know about farming. That's his business. Pretty much the only business along with related 'business' , fixing the farm equipment, animal husbandry, carpentry. think the girls know all that? Or maybe just 'girl' things like cooking and sewing, and milking.

You *do* realize that farming represents a rather complex and diverse realm of knowledge?

There seems to be some sort of assumption that farming is "lesser" somehow than, say, yoga instructing... My own farming, which is only a handful of crops, is quite challenging, managing an entire farmstead would require all sorts of skills and knowledge and experience. Especially if done in a sustainable, permaculturish fashion.

Do you think those good Amish parents are teaching their kids ... any foreign language besides english, or programming, or all the other bits of education you all take advantage of knowing and using.

Almost every Amish person I have met spoke multiple languages, generally English and at least one German dialect. I suspect they are more multi-lingual than your average "main stream" American. I was raised in a German-speaking household myself, and our Amish neighbors understood my German, their own German dialect, and English.

Sitting around a table with Amish folks, you'd figure this sort of thing out.

[Midwest]

should women turn over their rights to their own reproductive freedom and choices because certain peoples' religious and moral views seem to dictate that they should?

Should we concern ourselves far more with microscopic zygotes' rights than the rights of real, live children?

If by reproductive freedom and choices you mean abortion, it seems the rights of the "microscopic zygotes" become more important than the host at some point. When you have competing rights of two beings, it seems that morals must come into play. Religion and morals are two separate issues.

[ApatheticNoMore]

If by reproductive freedom and choices you mean abortion, it seems the rights of the "microscopic zygotes" become more important than the host at some point. When you have competing rights of two beings, it seems that morals must come into play. Religion and morals are two separate issues.

From a practical point of view, the hosts will still have to raise those microscopic zygotes when they are born, or at any rate although they could give them up for adoption, they will probably end up raising them. You can maybe make it harder for the hosts to get rid of the microscopic zygotes but you can't make them actually want to raise them. Problematic ...

[Midwest]

From a practical point of view, the hosts will still have to raise those microscopic zygotes when they are born, or at any rate although they could give them up for adoption, they will probably end up raising them. You can maybe make it harder for the hosts to get rid of the microscopic zygotes but you can't make them actually want to raise them. Problematic ...

If we can agree that birth control is ok (one end of the spectrum) and infanticide is wrong (other end of the spectrum), the answer lies somewhere in the middle respecting the rights of both. If the host is worried about the consequences of raising a child, they could choose to intervene nearer the birth control end of the spectrum.

[redfox]

Unless the local PP is closed - do I hear Texas? - and that's the only place one can afford contraception. Texas has nearly re-entered the 14th century, IMHO.

[Gregg]

You too Gregg?

Wooooo ahhhhh peggy. We've been having fun together long enough that you can be sure I wasn't gunning for you if I didn't quote you. I really am interested in, for complete lack of a better word, alternative cultures, including the Amish, and their methods and just wanted to jump in.

I think it's sad that Amish kids have less opportunity in THIS MODERN WORLD than your kids or my kids.

That is the perfect statement and perfect emphasis (seriously, no sarcasm). Brings up a lot of questions, huh? First, what difference does that make if Amish kids aren't going to live in this modern world? Is it a form of abuse or a statement of love to shelter kids from this modern world? If any parent teaches their kids the skills they need to thrive within their own culture shouldn't we offer them a huge ?

If an Amish kid would be better off learning modern skills doesn't the same logic say an Aborigine kid living in the outback of Australia or a Toulambi kid in the Amazon would also benefit? Would our kids be better off if we taught them how to use a butter churn? A blow gun? Are our kids neglected because we have not taught them how to use a loom? The real question there is who gets to decide what represents "better off"? Who do you want to decide for your kids?

IMO, the real downside is that one of those Amish kids could be the one that would write the great American novel, discover the cure for cancer, golf better than Tiger Woods, get us out of debt, unlock zero point energy, be the next Rembrandt... Yes, the world would suffer to miss out on that, but it still doesn't give us a right to impose our values on others.

[loosechickens]

And maybe that is the crux. The right of some to dictate the choices of others. On the one hand, many think it perfectly all right that if an adult woman becomes pregnant ,either from failure of contraception, even rape, etc., although said woman has free access to all information about pregnancy and childbirth, she should be forced to......... Undergo counseling, wait for 24-48 hours, undergo an invasive probing of her vagina, complete with showing her the pictures of the zygote, complete with listening to its heartbeat, in order for her not to make a "wrong" choice, etc. Yet many of the same people who want to make sure women have ALL the information before they choose to complete a pregnancy, seem cheerfully willing for large numbers of already born children to make important choices that will affect their entire lives after being systematically prevented from experiences and knowledge THEY would need to make an actual informed decision.

Maybe it the ludicrous quality of this that stymies me.

[Alan]

And maybe that is the crux. The right of some to dictate the choices of others. On the one hand, many think it perfectly all right that if an adult woman becomes pregnant ,either from failure of contraception, even rape, etc., although said woman has free access to all information about pregnancy and childbirth, she should be forced to......... Undergo counseling, wait for 24-48 hours, undergo an invasive probing of her vagina, complete with showing her the pictures of the zygote, complete with listening to its heartbeat, in order for her not to make a "wrong" choice, etc. Yet many of the same people who want to make sure women have ALL the information before they choose to complete a pregnancy, seem cheerfully willing for large numbers of already born children to make important choices that will affect their entire lives after being systematically prevented from experiences and knowledge THEY would need to make an actual informed decision.

Maybe it the ludicrous quality of this that stymies me.

And on the flip side, many folks seem to be of the opinion that a 'zygote' remains simple tissue until it's transformed by a live birth. That it's mother has the right to execute it at any time without even the courtesy of looking it in the eye (or even an image of it's eye) beforehand.

I agree with Midwest's remark that there is a middle ground between a collection of cells and a human. I'm not sure where that is, but to listen to pro-abortion folks, it doesn't matter. The language of pro-abortion doesn't allow words which may challenge the preferred orthodoxy, which seems way too self serving for my comfort level.

I'm stymied by the ludicrousness of it as well.

[peggy]

Thank you LC. You have put in words exactly my concern. I think these folks are closer to your example of the fundamentalist family than the hip, modern, savvy, connected people zoe keeps trying to convince us they are. I find limited opportunity for young people sad for them as well as any disadvantaged youth.

[HKPassey]

It is popular these days to strip the unborn of their humanity through language. The ultrasound image may be the first time some women realize that there's a baby in there.

Fine. But in that case, an external ultrasound will give an adequate image. To mandate a transvaginal ultrasound for this purpose is nothing more or less than intimidation - it really does feel very akin to rape to have this test, very invasive and highly uncomfortable as well.