Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Talk:Liberal quotient

2007-04-05T18:08:16Z

DrLib:

What a fabulous Encyclopedia entry, with entries like this I don't see [http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?site0=conservapedia.com&site1=&site2=&site3=&site4=&y=r&z=1&h=300&w=540&range=1m&size=Medium&url=conservapedia.com why no one is using this site?]

Fantastic!!
This means we now have a wonderful new method of assessing Conservative Bias, and for the first time it is measurable. To calculate the Conservative Quotient (CQ), all one has to do is to know the Liberal Quotient (LQ), then apply the formula: CQ = 1 - LQ.

A rating above zero presumably means that there is Conservative Bias?

Shurely Shome mishtake?

--[[User:CatWatcher|CatWatcher]] 13:39, 5 April 2007 (EDT)

== 80%? ==
A source for that might do nicely. [[User:DrLib|DrLib]] 14:08, 5 April 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Contraception

2007-04-04T23:02:04Z

DrLib: /* WHAT??!! */

===WHAT??!!===
Andrew Schlafly just cut all the information about contraception out of the contraception page. --[[User:Redblue|Redblue]] 18:19, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

Crap--[[User:palmd001|PalMD]][[User_talk:palmd001|talk]] 18:20, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

:How shocking. Statistics are apparently unencyclopedic. [[User:DrLib|DrLib]] 19:02, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

===Formatting===
Did it as a bulleted list, formatting help can be found here [http://www.conservapedia.com/Help:Editing].

Can't see this page lasting though, abstinence is the only form of contraception doncha know. [[User:JamesK|JamesK]] 20:32, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

== Expert opinion ==

Just a heads up, I am planning on doing extensive editing for content here, as it is needed. If you question my qualifications, please check out my profile and discussion page. Thanks.
[[User:Palmd001|Palmd001]] 21:29, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

The few bizarre citations used are low on primary statistics, and are from the UK. I am including NIH and other American statistics and sources.

Intimacy is an OPINION (inherently); it probably doesnt require citation, rather, an explanation of it's potential importance.
[[User:Palmd001|Palmd001]] 21:55, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

Im also removing the dangerous and ridiculous claim about contraception aiding sexual assault. That's like saying crowbars are likely to cause break-ins, or AK-47s are likely to cause mass-murder. Citing a case where evidence of an assault was missing because of condom use is not helpful. You would need regression analysis to show that condoms increase crime, etc.
[[User:Palmd001|Palmd001]] 22:35, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

:Palm, I look forward to your edits on this one. I hope you can flesh out my analysis of how the pill works - I think I'm right, and at any rate, it's already better than BillOReillyFan's version about how the Pill "destroys" the organs :-/-[[User:AmesG|AmesG]] 22:38, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

::Call me "Pal". You're not too far off; what really ends up happening is the prevention of ovulation, and, as with Plan B, if fertilization does take place, prevention of implantation. We probably need to divide the section into "barrier methods", hormonal methods, IUDs, and ?other. [[User:Palmd001|Palmd001]] 22:40, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

: I think that division is a great idea. It might run afoul of Andy's idea of obscenity, but I'll defend you, for whatever that's worth :-). So Pal-MD: are you a doctor? How awesome to have a real doctor edit some of the... errr... erroneous (?) articles on this site!-[[User:AmesG|AmesG]] 22:43, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
::Yes, Im a professor of medicine. See my talk page--it includes a somewhat surreal dialog with ASchlafly about my qualifications. Good amusement value though.[[User:Palmd001|Palmd001]] 22:46, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
: I find what Andy DOESN'T say almost as funny as what he DOES say. He refuses to talk, for instance, about most things relating to [[user:Conservative]]'s failure to do useful things on this site. He also refuses to address issues of bias, or commentaries on the compatibility of evolution and religion... and I did see that thing on your talk page, I forgot about it though! Good times.-[[User:AmesG|AmesG]] 22:53, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

I probably won't get that far with this tonight, as it's 11pm here, but when I return to this tomorrow, I assume it will be hacked to bits. [[User:Palmd001|Palmd001]] 23:03, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

BillFan, thanks for your help with the clean up. [[User:Palmd001|Palmd001]] 19:47, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

Please note that much of the above discussion is historical. I have specifically invited Andy to find a contributor to help with the last section.--[[User:palmd001|PalMD]][[User_talk:palmd001|talk]] 14:20, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

:Re: effectiveness of various methods: ''"Rhythm method" (also sometimes referred to as a method of "timed abstinence")''
:*Do you know what they call women who rely on the Rhythm method? [[/answer]] --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 17:03, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
::Where do people get a BAND at four [[o'clock]] in the morning?
That's a good thing, right?[[User:palmd001|PalMD]][[User_talk:palmd001|talk]] 17:47, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

== Perfect ==

This article is perfect and completely unbiased. Thanks to whoever fixed it up!

:: Oh-kayyyy... this is obviously some new definition of perfect that I've never come across. Abstinence is the best form of birth control is it? Well, yes, provided it works. However, the likelihood of it actually working means that it is less effective than almost any other means you care to imagine. This is really like claiming that condoms are 100% effective provided that (a) they are worn and (b) they do not split, leak or slip off.

--[[User:CatWatcher|CatWatcher]] 17:01, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Baraminology

2007-04-04T21:41:44Z

DrLib:

This article is excellent, but I would like to know what sources the author used before I go in and editing. After all, perhaps he has better sources than I do. --[[User:Ashens|Ashens]] 10:40 27 February 2007 (EST)

:The best reference to date is the review article [http://www.christiananswers.net/q-crs/baraminology.html "Baraminology -- Classification of Created Organisms"], by Wayne Frair, Ph.D, Originally published in ''CRS Quarterly'', Vol. 37, Num. 2, Sept. 2000. I have added this reference to the article. [[User:Rich P|Dr. Richard Paley]] 14:09, 27 February 2007 (EST)

As someone well-trained in biology, I would be interested in more support for this theory, for instance, physical/genetic evidence. Thanks.
[[User:Palmd001|Palmd001]] 11:20, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

:Physical/genetic evidence for what exactly? The article is about a classification system. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 07:48, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

::Physical/genetic evidence that the categories are meaningful distinctions, presumably. [[User:DrLib|DrLib]] 17:41, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

Neoconservatism

2007-04-04T21:33:47Z

DrLib: /* On Israel */ - grammar

A '''neoconservative''' (colloquially, ''neocon'') is a former liberal turned conservative. Neoconservatives believe that democracy can and should be installed around the world, even in Muslim countries such as Iraq, [[Iran]], and [[Saudi Arabia]]. It is said that neoconservatives were responsible for persuading President [[George W. Bush]] to invade Iraq, and they have lobbied for military action against [[Iran]] also.

==Origin==
[[Image:Kris.gif|thumb|right|Irving Kristol was dubbed by many as "the Godfather" of Neo-conservatism]]
Neo-conservatism was developed by a group of largely Jewish intellectuals graduated from the City College of New York in the late 1930's, a group that includes [[Irving Kristol]], [[Daniel Bell]], [[Nathan Glazer]].<ref>[http://www.amazon.com/Neoconservative-Revolution-Jewish-Intellectuals-Shaping/dp/0521836565/ref=sr_1_3/102-2076504-6567320?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1175142752&sr=8-3 The Neoconservative Revolution: Jewish Intellectuals and the Shaping of Public Policy, Murray Friedman, 2005]</ref> Many of this group came to despise the counterculture of the 1960's and what they felt was a growing "anti-Americanism" among many baby boomers. And during the [[cold war]] era, many of them came to realize the evil of the Stalinist regime.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/glogin?URI=http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/19/magazine/neo.html&OQ=_rQ3D1&OP=789ca3bQ2F@tVK@FQ27Q5C(LQ27Q271Q25@Q25GGQ3B@GQ25@Dh@Q24aQ3EaQ3Dg4V@4VQ27n-1Q24W After Neoconservatism, FRANCIS FUKUYAMA, February 19, 2006]</ref> Kristol described a neoconservative as a '''"liberal mugged by reality"'''. The development of neo-conservatism was strongly influenced by the work of German philosopher [[Leo Strauss]] and Marxist theorist [[Leon Trotsky]]. Irving Kristol himself was once a member of the [[4th international]].

== Publications ==
The leading publications of neoconservatives are Commentary and The [[Weekly Standard]]. Many Washington, D.C. think tanks, such as the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) and Henry Jackson Society are now dominated by neoconservatives.

==On Israel==
Neoconservatives advocate strong ties with the State of [[Israel]], both economically and militarily. Some [[paleoconservative|paleoconservatives]] such as [[Pat Buchanan]] have accused neoconservatives of putting the interests of Israel above those of America{{fact}}.

== Social Issues ==
[[Image:Wolfowitz.jpg|thumb|right|Former Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, was a prominent architect of the foreign policy of the George W. Bush administration known as the Bush Doctrine]]
Neoconservatives often take [[libertarian]] positions on social issues, and are unlikely to agree with religious conservatives on issues like abortion, prayer in school and same-sex marriage. Neoconservatives differ from libertarians in that neoconservatives tend to support [[Big government]] policies to further their objectives, and to support erosion of American liberty by [[Patriot act]] and other measures such as the implementation of federal [[gun control]].

In anticipation of vacancies on the [[U.S. Supreme Court]], the neoconservatives urged the selection of [[Michael McConnell]], a [[libertarian]]-leaning jurist, and [[J. Michael Luttig]], who declared ''[[Roe v. Wade]]'' to be "super-stare decisis"<ref>http://althouse.blogspot.com/2005/07/arlen-specter-makes-up-term.html</ref> and later left the judiciary to become general counsel of Boeing.<ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/10/AR2006051000929.html</ref> Both were passed over in filling the vacancies with religious conservatives.

==Influence==
Neoconservatives are small in number but dominate television talk shows, Washington-based think tanks, and advisory positions in Republican Administrations. Some prominent neoconservatives are [[Bill Kristol|William Kristol]], [[Paul Wolfowitz]], [[Lewis Libby]], [[David Horowitz]], [[Norman Podhoretz]], [[Daniel Pipes]], [[Charles Krauthammer]], [[Richard Perle]], [[Robert Kagan]], Christopher Hitchens, Willmoore Kendall, Stephen Schwartz, Elliott Abrams and Carl Gershman. Because of the Trotskyist background of some key neoconservatives, many critics have argued that the neoconservative concept of "'''global democratic revolution'''" was derived from the Trotskyist Fourth International's "'''vision of permanent revolution'''".<ref>http://antiwar.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&expire=&urlID=8208846&fb=Y&partnerID=16</ref>

== References ==

<references/>

==External Links==
:[http://www.henryjacksonsociety.org/ The Henry Jackson Society]
:[http://www.jinsa.org/home/home.html Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs]
:[http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/000tzmlw.asp The Neoconservative Persuasion by Irving Kristol]
:[http://www.danielpipes.org/ Daniel Pipe's official website]
:[http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/horowitz.html David Horowitz at Jewish World Review]
:[http://www.frontpagemag.com/blog/index.asp David Horowitz's FrontPageMag]

[[Category:Politics]]

Maxwell's demon

2007-04-03T20:15:54Z

DrLib: typo

'''Maxwell's demon''' is an imaginary being invoked in a thought experiment that illustrates the [[second law of thermodynamics]]. In the thought experiment there is a gas-filled container with two chambers and a small trap door in the partition between them. The 'demon' opens and closes the door to collect faster moving gas [[molecule]]s in one chamber and slower ones in the other chamber, hoping to create a difference in [[temperature]] between the two chambers.

Sigmund Freud

2007-04-03T17:58:05Z

DrLib:

{{stub}}'''Sigmund Freud''' (1856–1939) was the father of [[psychoanalysis]].
In 1938 he fled the Nazis by travelling to England, where he died later.

He co-founded the psychoanalytic school of psychology. Freud is best known for his theories of the unconscious mind, especially involving the mechanism of repression; his redefinition of sexual desire as mobile and directed towards a wide variety of objects; and his therapeutic technique, especially his understanding of transference in the therapeutic relationship and the symbolic interpretation of dreams as sources of insight into unconscious desires.

Freud proposed that the human psyche consists of three parts -- Ego, super-ego, and id -- and that defense mechanisms are an attempt by the mind to resolve conflicts between the super-ego and the id.

Freud's theories were unscientific, as pointed out by [[Karl Popper]] and others at the time. No one has ever been able to do any experiment that showed any merit to any of it. Freud lied about his own subjects to make it appear that his psychoanalysis had some benefit{{fact}}.

Sigmund Freud died of maxillary [[cancer]] at the age of 82.

== References ==
<references/>

[[Category:Scientists|Freud, Sigmund]]

Talk:Planned Parenthood

2007-04-02T22:51:52Z

DrLib:

== Start==
Biased, one-sided, of dubious accuracy, and a transparent attempt to demonise an organisation. Welcome to conservapedia. How can this site be expected to have any credability when all it offers is a distorted image of reality? I am surprised I do not see any accusations of deliberate genocide by Planned Par... oh, wait, there they are. My mistake. Now, how long before someone tries to compare them to a certian well-known dictator or his political party? - Suricou Raven.

I'm new at creating articles so any help would be great thanks.

:Thanks, Kathryn. I'm going to "move" your article to [[Planned Parenthood]] with the 2nd P capitalized. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 20:50, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

Thanks. I thought I'd have more time to work on this page but not untill tommorow. So it will be short for now I guess.

"Planned Parenthood vigorously opposes abstinence" -- Their website lists "continuous abstinence" as a form of birth control, with a long discussion of its pros and possible problems. It is in fact the first method listed. http://plannedparenthood.org/birth-control-pregnancy/birth-control/continuous-abstinence.htm

"They profit from [[abortion]]" -- They're a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization. Is it accurate to say they 'profit' from anything at all? [[User:Jtl|Jtl]] 01:32, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Article is starting out very bias. It is too anti-planned parenting and since it has no sitations I am removing that part of the article and anyone who can help by contributing usefull information that is not bias would be lovely. Thanks :) ~ And also I am unsure how to make citations or whatever so im just adding links as subscripts and hopefully someone can help me out thanks

:Can there be some balance in this article? I think I've seen ''provides maternal and reproductive health-care to women and couples'' entered and romoved multiple times.

:The issue seems to be:
:*Is PP only about abortions and contraceptives - i.e., '''preventing''' pregnancy and childbirth?
:*Or is it a significant provider of pregnancy and childbirth '''support'''? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 23:10, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Sorry, I keep trying to make the article but Bananaman keeps erasing it just to say they preform abortions. It's getting annoying and it'd be lovely if someone could ban them or something so I could complete this article to be completely unbias and not lacking any important information.

::I'm sorry that you disagree with me Karyn, but Planned Parenthood is clearly in the busines of performing abortions, funding abortions, promoting abortions as birth control, and using abortion as population control. Just because you disagree with me doesn't mean that your views aren't wrong. You can take your liberal agenda to WIkipedia, where they support such 'freedom of speech'. --[[User:Bananaman|Bananaman]] 23:14, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

No, actualy it's not. Just because you say it is doesn't mean it's so. Planned Parenthood is an organization that provides reproductive health care and preforms abortions as a last resort type thing. I am not being controversal. I am making a simple clean article. And just because you want be all weird about it is not my problem. Everyone deserves the right to know the truth, and saying planned parenthood ONLY does abortions and does it to be evil is just not right. The article is clean, short and to the point.

P.S. My names Kathryn :) Not karyn. ~

:::I don't ban so quickly as that. You two try to work this out, please. Here is the problematic stuff:

::::Planned Parenthood provides maternal and reproductive health-care to women and couples. They are an international non profit organization that is committed to providing low coast health care. Planned Parenthood offers high-quality health care. [http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/who-we-are.htm] They promote abstinence as the only sure way to avoid an unwanted pregnancy, but also provide birth control. [http://plannedparenthood.org/birth-control-pregnancy/birth-control/continuous-abstinence.htm] Planned Parenthood Federation of America states that all individuals should have the freedom to make reproductive decisions.They believe that the freedom to make reproductive decisions involves the right to privacy, especially in relationships; the right to education and that every individual should be able to make a informed decisions about sexuality and reproduction; and the right to nondiscriminatory access to comprehensive and confidential healthcare. [http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/who-we-are/mission-and-policy-statements.htm]

:::I'm sure a balanced article can come out of this. Let me know if you need help. I'll check back in a day or two. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 23:18, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Okay this article keeps getting switched and moved around. I can't tell whats going on. But really, I used no foul language, nothing innapropriate and kept it short and simple. It's not like I wrote stuff like OMG EVERYONE GET AN ABORTION YAY or something, no. I didn't. The article is unbiased. I am neither for or against planned parenting. I'm neutral. I don't know why everyone thinks im evil for writing this article or something, but frankly you guys call wikipedia 'biased' but atleast they provide the truth on subects. I'm simply trying to help out here by providing a neutral view on the subject by creating a clean and short article.

==Typo==

Changing the subject of the discussion page, what exactly is low "coast" health care?[[User:NSmyth|NSmyth]] 01:14, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
:Brilliance. Since the world is getting warmer the oceans will rise and the coasts will become "lower", [[User:Conservative]] is just ahead of the game.

== Structure ==

Sanger was crazy. Known fact. No-one today favors eugenics, not [[Planned Parenthood]], not anyone. As such, to prevent such an inflammatory statement from being made, I restructured the latter half of the article.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 01:23, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
: Oh, please note that I have deleted no citations, even the ones I think are abominable. This was a neutral edit, and I hope it will be treated as such.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 01:25, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
That edit was all context, and important for your readers. Debate it here before you revert it!-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 01:34, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
:Another of Conservative's pet projects, protected & biased, here we come.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 01:36, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
::Oh, whoops, sorry, was that me who despite protection changed it back to something a little less...inflammatory and biased? Sorry.[[User:NSmyth|Nsmyth]] 01:45, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

== Problem with First Paragraph ==

An organization's own materials are not authority for self-serving claims it makes about itself. This entry is in a revert war so it may not be clear exactly what I'm talking about, but the versions that repeatedly cite to the organization's own self-serving claims are inappropriate for an encyclopedia. We are to be more objective than that.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 01:48, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

== Unsourced statements being allowed by Sysop NSmyth ==

Unsourced statements are being allowed by Sysop NSmyth. Why are you saying that the present organization is not racist. Where is your proof? Where are the sources?

I suggest reading:

[http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40023 Planned Parenthood charged with racism] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:59, 2 April 2007 (EDT)conservative
:I'm still trying to find the part of the article that denies racism. The article seems to neither confirm or deny racism, but I occasionally miss subtle things like that. Point it out for me and I'll gladly look for a source, if I can't find one, I'll remove that line in the article.[[User:NSmyth|NSmyth]] 02:03, 2 April 2007 (EDT)... I'm also good at missing obvious links in talk pages when I'm tired heh. Put that in.[[User:NSmyth|NSmyth]]

:::Please look at my present version and see if everything is supported. Also, I am building a case through more and more research. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:09, 2 April 2007 (EDT)conservative

::::Conservative, for probably the first time since I first noticed your edits, I am in agreement with you. I'm perfectly happy with your work on the article at this point.[[User:NSmyth|NSmyth]] 07:12, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

==External Links==
Here a couple of external links:
*[http://www.plannedparenthood.org/ Planned Parenthood Federation of America]
*[http://www.all.org/stopp/plan.htm American Life League presents STOPP International] Since the article is protected, please add them. [[User:Crocoite|Crocoite]][[User Talk:Crocoite|talk]] 02:14, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

== Sources ==

Dear [[User:Conservative]]:

Missionaries to Preborn cites numerous sources. You do not know what those sources say. Go to the library, look them up, make sure they're accurate. Missionaries to Preborn is not a scholarly or journalistic organization. You know absolutely nothing about the level of rigor they used in researching what amounts to be an opinion piece. Likewise, the citizens review online site has copied an article whole hog from Concerned Women for America. That link is dead. Makes it tricky to verify the process doesn't it? The Muse website requires registration. World Net Daily is, sadly, your most reliable source. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 03:05, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

Further.... Conservative, is it even possible for you to work on an article without locking it? '''THIS IS A WIKI!''' [[User:Myk|Myk]] 03:10, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
:::I have checked several statements in regards to the article you cited and they checked out. Again, which statement is in error? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 03:13, 2 April 2007 (EDT)conservative

Ok, I'm not going to try and start any fights here. I said some of these sources are uncredible, and I am going to back up what I said. However, I want to apologize for what I did early, I should have given you a reason.

# Missionariestopreborn, first off, uses picture of aborted fetuses, which I feel not only is unethical, but an abomination under God. Secondly, as myk said above, the article is using other sources, we should be using THOSE sources, and not the "missionariestopreborn" page.
# Citzen'sreview seems more credible, I still purport that perhaps we should be using the orginal material, I also wish that the original article could be accessed an not this hosted version.
# The Muse page seems well done, and is attached to a scholarly journal.
# The Eternal World Television has an obvious bias, and many statements in the article are quotes out of context, seen here. [http://web.archive.org/web/20060426020211/www.plannedparenthood.org/pp2/portal/medicalinfo/birthcontrol/bio-margaret-sanger.xml]

"The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it." [4]

"We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members." [5]

Both of these quotes are examples of quote mining or mis context of the quote. In the first quote, we can see that she is being Ironic when we look at the context. In the second quote, when we look at the full quote, we see that she doesn't want the word to get out because it would be a misconception.

# WorldNetDaily has an obvious bias and the site is riddled with fake ads about energy pills and the like. Pertaining to the actual article, I do not know whether or not it is what it purports to be, but it is obvious that it is not from a NPOV.
# LifeSite, this site appears much more credible, I have no problems with this site.

--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 03:23, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

Forums should not be cited as sources, because anybody can post anything on there. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 03:38, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

:What forums?--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 03:40, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

::::I did further research to bolster my racism/Sanger claim. Please see additional quotes. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 06:13, 2 April 2007 (EDT)conservative

== current research ==

"George Grant points out in his history of Planned Parenthood, Grand Illusions (1988), Sanger devoted the entire April 1933 issue of Birth Control Review to eugenics. One of the articles, "Eugenic Sterilization: An Urgent Need," was written by Ernst Rudin, Hitler's director of genetic sterilization and a founder of the Nazi Society for Racial Hygiene." [http://www-swiss.ai.mit.edu/~rauch/abortion_eugenics/american-spectator_eugenics.html]

'''*OK... right there. You quoted The American Spectator but where it was sourced on an MIT host. ''The source is not MIT, it is the American Spectator.'' And... it's not even the American Spectator! it's about a book, Grand Illusions. Have you read this book? You're quoting a website, quoting an opinion piece in a magazine which is discussing a book which talks about a magazine from 1933. Throw Kevin Bacon in there and you have a fun little party game. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 03:26, 2 April 2007 (EDT)'''

"During the 1930s Margaret Sanger published The Birth Control Review, in which she openly supported Nazi Germany's "infanticide program" in the 1930s, and publicly championed Adolf Hitler's goal of Aryan white supremacy. Prior to World War II she commissioned Nazi Ernst Rudin, director of the dreaded German medical experimentation programs, to serve as an advisor to her organization." [http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a380249a34016.htm]

'In 1939, Margaret Sanger organized the Negro Project, designed to eliminate members of what she believed to be an "inferior race." She justified her proposal because "the masses of Negroes... particularly in the South, still breed carelessly and disastrously, with the result that the increase among Negroes, even more than among whites, is from that portion of the population least intelligent and fit..."3" [http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a380249a34016.htm]

==MUST==
You lock '''''every''''' article you edit [[User:Conservative| Conservative]]? [[User:Rob Pommer| Cracker]][[User_talk:Rob_Pommer|talk]]
:I have a source:http://www.interlife.org/woman.html Feel free to use it. It's the actual online version of the book that was quoted by the misionariestothepreborn.org site. It's a '''Primary''' source, which ought to be used if available, which, as you can plainly see, it is. Thank you. [[User:Rob Pommer| Cracker]][[User_talk:Rob_Pommer|talk]] 09:38, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

==Misattributed Quotes==
Not surprisingly, Conservative, you have false information in your article. The second quote you have attruibuted to Sanger ("The mass of ignorant Negroes") was actually said by W.E.B. DuBois in the June 1932 issue of ''Birth Control Review''--[[User:Dave3172|Dave3172]] 09:41, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

:Actually, most of the quotes in the article are examples of quote mining, mis-attributed quotes, or quotes out of context.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 15:23, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

::I know. Misleading quotes and Conservative are the Reese's Peanut Butter Cup of Conservapedia; they just go together.--[[User:Dave3172|Dave3172]] 16:15, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

:::We were all wrong about that quote: "the mass of signficant Negroes, particularly in the South, still breed carelessly and disastrously, with the result that the increase among Negroes, even more than among whites, is [in] that portion of the population least intelligent and fit and least able to rear children properly."<ref>http://www.jstor.org/view/00147354/di975884/97p14282/1?frame=noframe&userID=80cdbf34@buffalo.edu/01cce4406300501bbf062&dpi=3&config=jstor</ref> (Margaret Sanger - The "Negro Project" quoting W.E.B. Dubious with the omission of one word) I do thank you though and I was intending to double check that quote when I back from my appointment and then I saw your message.

[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 17:01, 2 April 2007 (EDT)conservative

:Conservative, I would ask that you either use the full quote from Sanger in reqards to exterminating Negros and ministers, as I puts the quote into context.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 17:18, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

Specifically, this is the full text.

“It seems to me from my experience . . . in North Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee, and Texas, that while the colored Negroes have great respect for white doctors, they can get closer to their own members and more or less lay their cards on the table. . . . They do not do this with the white people, and if we can train the Negro doctor at the clinic, he can go among them with enthusiasm and with knowledge, which, I believe, will have far-reaching results. . . . His work, in my opinion, should be entirely with the Negro profession and the nurses, hospital, social workers, as well as the County’s white doctors. His success will depend upon his personality and his training by us.

The minister’s work is also important, and also he should be trained, perhaps by the Federation, as to our ideals and the goal that we hope to reach. '''We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs.'''”

The bolded part is the only part in the article and misrepresents the quote.

--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 17:26, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
:::I guess the "our ideals and the goal that we hope to reach" is rather vague. So I will delete the quote unless greater context shows its valid. 17:41, 2 April 2007 (EDT)conservative
::::Thank You!--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 18:33, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

== Represent the Good Side (posted on Andy's wall, too) ==

I think the articles gives too little credit for good things that Planned Parenthood does. I have many friends (who have never had sex) who use Planned Parenthood for cheaper birth control pills, to regulate their hormones and control what would otherwise be excruciatingly painful cycles, if you know what I mean. They also use Planned Parenthood for annual gynecological exams at a discounted rate, since having a private practice doctor do the same exam is significantly more expensive. I think we can disagree about abortions, but I think women's health is an absolute positive, and something that Planned Parenthood does well. The article should say so.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 10:17, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
:The argument that would be made here is that the only reason the health-care and medicines are so cheap is that the abortions performed at PP subsidize everything else. In other words, a woman gets "gynecological exams at a discounted rate" because she's getting them at the expense of dead babies. In other ''other'' words there is no good at Planned Parenthood only ''less bad'' things. [[User:Rob Pommer| Cracker]][[User_talk:Rob_Pommer|talk]] 10:31, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
::If health care was cheaper in America, women wouldn't have to get cheaper health care at the "expense of dead babies". Personally, I'm all for planned parenthood(notice the lack of capitalization, I'm talking about the idea, not the organization), and I definitly like the idea of health care being more available to women. I don't believe in forcing others to believe what I believe, so I'm pro-choice. If a woman gets an abortion, it doesn't bother me, it doesn't effect me(in any way shape or form, try to tell me that God will smite me because I say this, I do believe the bible says to leave the judgement up to him, that's exactly what I'm doing). I'm not saying it's right, I'm saying it's not my decision, and it's not anyone else's either. The choice about whether or not having an abortion is right lies with the mother and the father of the unborn child, and only them. I apologize for the semi-rant.[[User:NSmyth|NSmyth]] 12:43, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
:::Don't apologize - it's one of the most lucid, rational things anyone has said here.--[[User:Dave3172|Dave3172]] 13:21, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

== Interesting ==

Interesting article, but it really should be named something like "controversial historical issues in PP" given that most of the content has absolutely nothing to do with the modern organization. I have a decent amount of contact with them, and their current organization is completely misrepresented here. It really is a travesty, but I'm not the one to fix it.--[[User:palmd001|PalMD]][[User_talk:palmd001|talk]] 10:30, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

:Indeed. Conservative, out of curiosity, do you genuinely believe that PP has more facilities in "ethnic schools" (as you called them) or neighborhoods as part of a strategy to reduce the number of minorities in the US? Besides the larger POV issue, this entry is not well written. [[User:Murray|Murray]] 11:40, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

==Advocacy==

PP does not simply "provide health services". It has positions and asserts them loudly.

Here is an example:

"Throughout the year, the federal government steps up its war on women and freedom of choice ... " [snip by Ed Poor for CP discussion]

* The U.S. State Department freezes $3 million in funding to the World Health Organization (WHO) in response to anti-choice objections to the WHO's Human Reproduction Program; HHS Web sites remove medically accurate information about condom effectiveness and the lack of a proven link between abortion and breast cancer; the HHS Secretary's Advisory Committee on Human Research Protection Charter gives embryos new status as "human subjects;" and "abstinence-only" proponent Dr. Alma Golden is named to oversee Title X, the nation's family planning program. [http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/who-we-are/2000-present-9929.htm]

This implies that they strongly oppose abstinence - a point 'fact-tagged' in the article recently. They use this bullet point as 'ammunition' in the 'war' over "women and freedom of choice".

This implies that they favor the POV of the United Nations, as the WHO is completely under UN control.

This accuses HHS of removing "medically accurate information about condom effectiveness", whatever that means. Looks like they advocate condom use for something - is it [[contraception]] and/or [[VD prevention]]? (Sorry about the archaic language, I don't think I'll ever make the switch to 'STD' - sounds like an oil additive.)

This asserts that there is no "proven link between abortion and breast cancer".

A whole bunch of interesting points to keep us busy in coming weeks. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 12:05, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

:There's an enormous difference between opposing abstinence and opposing abstinence-only sex ed. Are you sure they're referring to the former? [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 12:08, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

::It seems pretty clear that their opposition is to abstinence ''only'' sex ed. [[User:DrLib|DrLib]] 12:46, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Tsumetai, no, I'm not sure. That's what these discussion pages are for.

:::But I'm also not sure whether there's much difference between (1) opposing abstinence and (2) saying "abstinence would be better, but we don't really think you are capable of it, and since you're going to fornicate anyway, try (blank)". --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 12:49, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
::::It's closer to saying, "abstinence would be betterm but if you don't believe in the same things we do, and feel that you must fornicate, use (insert method of birth control here) in order to help keep yourselves from getting STIs and from becoming parents at such a young age."[[User:NSmyth|NSmyth]] 12:55, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

:::I think there's a big difference between the 2. And I suspect the attitude is more "here are some things you should know if you choose to have sex" rather than "because we don't think you can help yourselves." [[User:DrLib|DrLib]] 12:56, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

Ed, im not that younger than you, but no one uses VD anymore...get with the times man! Anyway, like I said, I work with them a lot, they have nothing against abstinence, just education that excludes things other than abstinence.--[[User:palmd001|PalMD]][[User_talk:palmd001|talk]] 12:51, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

And btw, to repost the link above, I really think that should clear things up, but what do I know...
http://plannedparenthood.org/birth-control-pregnancy/birth-control/continuous-abstinence.htm [[User:palmd001|PalMD]][[User_talk:palmd001|talk]] 12:53, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

And, BTW, I think it is reasonable to debate the racism issue, but it is not a "done deal". Poor minority communities have less access to health care in general, and PP does provide needed services. I do not think their primary motivation is racist, however, it is an interesting point to discuss.--[[User:palmd001|PalMD]][[User_talk:palmd001|talk]] 12:58, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

:What I would like to see is a correlation being drawn. It is not enough to say "African-American communities have more Planned Parenthood operations, thus Planned Parenthood is trying to exterminate African-Americans." If I were to write that in a research essay, I think my stats professor would shoot me.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 16:29, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

== aborted babies pic source - I found substitute links. Problem solved ==

aborted babies pic source - I found substitute links. Problem solved [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:37, 2 April 2007 (EDT)conservative

:Thank you Conservative! I really appreciate that!--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 16:47, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

== Miscellaneous Reply ==

Thanks for the good discussion above. I would like to respond to a few points here:

* It's true, of course, that Planned Parenthood is a "non-profit" business so use of the word "profit" is problematic. But it is a huge business and the biggest provider of abortions in the United States. It makes a large excess of revenue over expenses, which we ordinarily call "profit". It is not a charity in the same sense as, for example, a church. Those "profits" of Planned Parenthood accrue to the benefit of its employees, its consultants, its allies and its doctors.

* Only a small percentage of Planned Parenthood's services provide needed medical care to poor communities.

* Planned Parenthood does target minority areas with advertisements for abortion that might be considered to be deceptive. I won't say that these advertisements are racist in intent, but they do have a disparate racial effect.

* Virtually every woman who has an abortion is worse off in terms of her health. Childbirth is good for the health of the mother, and no one disputes that. Abortion has been linked to breast cancer (nearly every study has found a link, see [[abortion]]) and also to devastating premature birth (see also [[abortion]]).

* Due in large part to Planned Parenthood's aggressive marketing in minority communities, African Americans have three times the abortion rate of whites, and three times the rate of premature births and associated devastating injuries. (I'm not sure how the breast cancer rate compares between African American and white women, but maybe someone else knows this.)

I'm not asking for specific changes to the content page, but it seems to me a skeptical look at what Planned Parenthood really does to make its millions of dollars is appropriate. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:09, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

:: Andy, for the record, on the "abortion & cancer" stuff, the stats are correlated but causation is not implied, and any credible scientist would find that. I bet people who read this site are more likely than a carefully selected and retooled focus group to get breast cancer, too. Second, you should tell the mothers who died throughout history in childbirth that it's "good" for their health. Third, even if it is better for the health of the mother, it's not your call to force, in a paternalistic manner that most conservatives are opposed to, health decisions down their throat. Fourth, I think your use of "disparate impact" and "intent" rhetoric is insulting to constitutional law and misleading. However, let's jump on it to say that disparate impact never proves intent in modern constitutional law (cf. ''McClesky''), so you should remove any language from the article that insinuates a discriminatory intent. Fifth, I thank God every day that I do not live in an America controlled by people like you. No offense intended, but this country is better for it.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 18:37, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

I'd like to see some sort of evidence that PP's "aggressive marketing in minority communities" is largely responsible for disparate abortion rates. Also, the abortion and cancer stuff remains a stretch. While women who've given birth eventually have lower risk of breast cancer, for 5-15 years afterward the risk is higher - Liu et al (2002), ''Cancer Causes & Control'', 13: 299-305; Lambe et al (1994), NEJM, 331:5-9. Also, having an abortion has been linked to decreased risk of other cancers - Parslov et al (2000), ''American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology'', 182:23-29. So, not really that simple after all. [[User:DrLib|DrLib]] 18:51, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

Contraception

2007-04-02T21:05:28Z

DrLib:

'''Contraception''' (Lat. ''against conception'') generally refers to methods of preventing pregnancy (birth control). There are many different methods, each having its own level of effectiveness and safety. The safest and most effective form of birth control is [[abstinence]]. The argument could be made that this is not actually "birth control" as there was never a risk for a pregnancy, but in common parlance, abstinence is the first line of protection.
Except for condoms, most methods offer little protection against [[STD|sexually transmitted disease]]s.

== Barrier Methods ==

*Male condom
*Female Condom
*Sponge
*Cervical cap
*Diaphragm

== Hormonal Methods ==

*Oral Contraceptive Pills (OCPs)
*Depoprogesterone
*Vaginal ring
*"Rhythm method" (also sometimes referred to as a method of "timed abstinence")

== Other ==

*Intrauterine device (medicated and bare)

== Religious Perspectives ==

[http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/birthcontrol.html Information on Birth Control]

Godel's Incompleteness Theorems

2007-04-02T19:45:56Z

DrLib:

Gödel's incompleteness theorems are 2 theorems published in 1931 by [[Kurt Gödel]] that reveal the limitations of the axiomatic approch to mathematics.

'''Godel's First Incompleteness Theorem''': Peano Arithmetic or any extension of Peano Arithmetic is either incomplete or inconsistent.

'''Godel's Second Incompleteness Theorem''': Any set of axioms that asserts its own consistency is inconsistent.

[[category:mathematics]]

Talk:Planned Parenthood

2007-04-02T16:56:20Z

DrLib: /* Advocacy */

Biased, one-sided, of dubious accuracy, and a transparent attempt to demonise an organisation. Welcome to conservapedia. How can this site be expected to have any credability when all it offers is a distorted image of reality? I am surprised I do not see any accusations of deliberate genocide by Planned Par... oh, wait, there they are. My mistake. Now, how long before someone tries to compare them to a certian well-known dictator or his political party? - Suricou Raven.

I'm new at creating articles so any help would be great thanks.

:Thanks, Kathryn. I'm going to "move" your article to [[Planned Parenthood]] with the 2nd P capitalized. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 20:50, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

Thanks. I thought I'd have more time to work on this page but not untill tommorow. So it will be short for now I guess.

"Planned Parenthood vigorously opposes abstinence" -- Their website lists "continuous abstinence" as a form of birth control, with a long discussion of its pros and possible problems. It is in fact the first method listed. http://plannedparenthood.org/birth-control-pregnancy/birth-control/continuous-abstinence.htm

"They profit from [[abortion]]" -- They're a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization. Is it accurate to say they 'profit' from anything at all? [[User:Jtl|Jtl]] 01:32, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Article is starting out very bias. It is too anti-planned parenting and since it has no sitations I am removing that part of the article and anyone who can help by contributing usefull information that is not bias would be lovely. Thanks :) ~ And also I am unsure how to make citations or whatever so im just adding links as subscripts and hopefully someone can help me out thanks

:Can there be some balance in this article? I think I've seen ''provides maternal and reproductive health-care to women and couples'' entered and romoved multiple times.

:The issue seems to be:
:*Is PP only about abortions and contraceptives - i.e., '''preventing''' pregnancy and childbirth?
:*Or is it a significant provider of pregnancy and childbirth '''support'''? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 23:10, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Sorry, I keep trying to make the article but Bananaman keeps erasing it just to say they preform abortions. It's getting annoying and it'd be lovely if someone could ban them or something so I could complete this article to be completely unbias and not lacking any important information.

::I'm sorry that you disagree with me Karyn, but Planned Parenthood is clearly in the busines of performing abortions, funding abortions, promoting abortions as birth control, and using abortion as population control. Just because you disagree with me doesn't mean that your views aren't wrong. You can take your liberal agenda to WIkipedia, where they support such 'freedom of speech'. --[[User:Bananaman|Bananaman]] 23:14, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

No, actualy it's not. Just because you say it is doesn't mean it's so. Planned Parenthood is an organization that provides reproductive health care and preforms abortions as a last resort type thing. I am not being controversal. I am making a simple clean article. And just because you want be all weird about it is not my problem. Everyone deserves the right to know the truth, and saying planned parenthood ONLY does abortions and does it to be evil is just not right. The article is clean, short and to the point.

P.S. My names Kathryn :) Not karyn. ~

:::I don't ban so quickly as that. You two try to work this out, please. Here is the problematic stuff:

::::Planned Parenthood provides maternal and reproductive health-care to women and couples. They are an international non profit organization that is committed to providing low coast health care. Planned Parenthood offers high-quality health care. [http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/who-we-are.htm] They promote abstinence as the only sure way to avoid an unwanted pregnancy, but also provide birth control. [http://plannedparenthood.org/birth-control-pregnancy/birth-control/continuous-abstinence.htm] Planned Parenthood Federation of America states that all individuals should have the freedom to make reproductive decisions.They believe that the freedom to make reproductive decisions involves the right to privacy, especially in relationships; the right to education and that every individual should be able to make a informed decisions about sexuality and reproduction; and the right to nondiscriminatory access to comprehensive and confidential healthcare. [http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/who-we-are/mission-and-policy-statements.htm]

:::I'm sure a balanced article can come out of this. Let me know if you need help. I'll check back in a day or two. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 23:18, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Okay this article keeps getting switched and moved around. I can't tell whats going on. But really, I used no foul language, nothing innapropriate and kept it short and simple. It's not like I wrote stuff like OMG EVERYONE GET AN ABORTION YAY or something, no. I didn't. The article is unbiased. I am neither for or against planned parenting. I'm neutral. I don't know why everyone thinks im evil for writing this article or something, but frankly you guys call wikipedia 'biased' but atleast they provide the truth on subects. I'm simply trying to help out here by providing a neutral view on the subject by creating a clean and short article.

==Typo==

Changing the subject of the discussion page, what exactly is low "coast" health care?[[User:NSmyth|NSmyth]] 01:14, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
:Brilliance. Since the world is getting warmer the oceans will rise and the coasts will become "lower", [[User:Conservative]] is just ahead of the game.

== Structure ==

Sanger was crazy. Known fact. No-one today favors eugenics, not [[Planned Parenthood]], not anyone. As such, to prevent such an inflammatory statement from being made, I restructured the latter half of the article.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 01:23, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
: Oh, please note that I have deleted no citations, even the ones I think are abominable. This was a neutral edit, and I hope it will be treated as such.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 01:25, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
That edit was all context, and important for your readers. Debate it here before you revert it!-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 01:34, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
:Another of Conservative's pet projects, protected & biased, here we come.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 01:36, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
::Oh, whoops, sorry, was that me who despite protection changed it back to something a little less...inflammatory and biased? Sorry.[[User:NSmyth|Nsmyth]] 01:45, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

== Problem with First Paragraph ==

An organization's own materials are not authority for self-serving claims it makes about itself. This entry is in a revert war so it may not be clear exactly what I'm talking about, but the versions that repeatedly cite to the organization's own self-serving claims are inappropriate for an encyclopedia. We are to be more objective than that.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 01:48, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

== Unsourced statements being allowed by Sysop NSmyth ==

Unsourced statements are being allowed by Sysop NSmyth. Why are you saying that the present organization is not racist. Where is your proof? Where are the sources?

I suggest reading:

[http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40023 Planned Parenthood charged with racism] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:59, 2 April 2007 (EDT)conservative
:I'm still trying to find the part of the article that denies racism. The article seems to neither confirm or deny racism, but I occasionally miss subtle things like that. Point it out for me and I'll gladly look for a source, if I can't find one, I'll remove that line in the article.[[User:NSmyth|NSmyth]] 02:03, 2 April 2007 (EDT)... I'm also good at missing obvious links in talk pages when I'm tired heh. Put that in.[[User:NSmyth|NSmyth]]

:::Please look at my present version and see if everything is supported. Also, I am building a case through more and more research. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 02:09, 2 April 2007 (EDT)conservative

::::Conservative, for probably the first time since I first noticed your edits, I am in agreement with you. I'm perfectly happy with your work on the article at this point.[[User:NSmyth|NSmyth]] 07:12, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

==External Links==
Here a couple of external links:
*[http://www.plannedparenthood.org/ Planned Parenthood Federation of America]
*[http://www.all.org/stopp/plan.htm American Life League presents STOPP International] Since the article is protected, please add them. [[User:Crocoite|Crocoite]][[User Talk:Crocoite|talk]] 02:14, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

== Sources ==

Dear [[User:Conservative]]:

Missionaries to Preborn cites numerous sources. You do not know what those sources say. Go to the library, look them up, make sure they're accurate. Missionaries to Preborn is not a scholarly or journalistic organization. You know absolutely nothing about the level of rigor they used in researching what amounts to be an opinion piece. Likewise, the citizens review online site has copied an article whole hog from Concerned Women for America. That link is dead. Makes it tricky to verify the process doesn't it? The Muse website requires registration. World Net Daily is, sadly, your most reliable source. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 03:05, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

Further.... Conservative, is it even possible for you to work on an article without locking it? '''THIS IS A WIKI!''' [[User:Myk|Myk]] 03:10, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
:::I have checked several statements in regards to the article you cited and they checked out. Again, which statement is in error? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 03:13, 2 April 2007 (EDT)conservative

Ok, I'm not going to try and start any fights here. I said some of these sources are uncredible, and I am going to back up what I said. However, I want to apologize for what I did early, I should have given you a reason.

# Missionariestopreborn, first off, uses picture of aborted fetuses, which I feel not only is unethical, but an abomination under God. Secondly, as myk said above, the article is using other sources, we should be using THOSE sources, and not the "missionariestopreborn" page.
# Citzen'sreview seems more credible, I still purport that perhaps we should be using the orginal material, I also wish that the original article could be accessed an not this hosted version.
# The Muse page seems well done, and is attached to a scholarly journal.
# The Eternal World Television has an obvious bias, and many statements in the article are quotes out of context, seen here. [http://web.archive.org/web/20060426020211/www.plannedparenthood.org/pp2/portal/medicalinfo/birthcontrol/bio-margaret-sanger.xml]

"The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it." [4]

"We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members." [5]

Both of these quotes are examples of quote mining or mis context of the quote. In the first quote, we can see that she is being Ironic when we look at the context. In the second quote, when we look at the full quote, we see that she doesn't want the word to get out because it would be a misconception.

# WorldNetDaily has an obvious bias and the site is riddled with fake ads about energy pills and the like. Pertaining to the actual article, I do not know whether or not it is what it purports to be, but it is obvious that it is not from a NPOV.
# LifeSite, this site appears much more credible, I have no problems with this site.

--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 03:23, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

Forums should not be cited as sources, because anybody can post anything on there. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 03:38, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

:What forums?--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 03:40, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

::::I did further research to bolster my racism/Sanger claim. Please see additional quotes. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 06:13, 2 April 2007 (EDT)conservative

== current research ==

"George Grant points out in his history of Planned Parenthood, Grand Illusions (1988), Sanger devoted the entire April 1933 issue of Birth Control Review to eugenics. One of the articles, "Eugenic Sterilization: An Urgent Need," was written by Ernst Rudin, Hitler's director of genetic sterilization and a founder of the Nazi Society for Racial Hygiene." [http://www-swiss.ai.mit.edu/~rauch/abortion_eugenics/american-spectator_eugenics.html]

'''*OK... right there. You quoted The American Spectator but where it was sourced on an MIT host. ''The source is not MIT, it is the American Spectator.'' And... it's not even the American Spectator! it's about a book, Grand Illusions. Have you read this book? You're quoting a website, quoting an opinion piece in a magazine which is discussing a book which talks about a magazine from 1933. Throw Kevin Bacon in there and you have a fun little party game. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 03:26, 2 April 2007 (EDT)'''

"During the 1930s Margaret Sanger published The Birth Control Review, in which she openly supported Nazi Germany's "infanticide program" in the 1930s, and publicly championed Adolf Hitler's goal of Aryan white supremacy. Prior to World War II she commissioned Nazi Ernst Rudin, director of the dreaded German medical experimentation programs, to serve as an advisor to her organization." [http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a380249a34016.htm]

'In 1939, Margaret Sanger organized the Negro Project, designed to eliminate members of what she believed to be an "inferior race." She justified her proposal because "the masses of Negroes... particularly in the South, still breed carelessly and disastrously, with the result that the increase among Negroes, even more than among whites, is from that portion of the population least intelligent and fit..."3" [http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a380249a34016.htm]

==MUST==
You lock '''''every''''' article you edit [[User:Conservative| Conservative]]? [[User:Rob Pommer| Cracker]][[User_talk:Rob_Pommer|talk]]
:I have a source:http://www.interlife.org/woman.html Feel free to use it. It's the actual online version of the book that was quoted by the misionariestothepreborn.org site. It's a '''Primary''' source, which ought to be used if available, which, as you can plainly see, it is. Thank you. [[User:Rob Pommer| Cracker]][[User_talk:Rob_Pommer|talk]] 09:38, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

==Misattributed Quotes==
Not surprisingly, Conservative, you have false information in your article. The second quote you have attruibuted to Sanger ("The mass of ignorant Negroes") was actually said by W.E.B. DuBois in the June 1932 issue of ''Birth Control Review''--[[User:Dave3172|Dave3172]] 09:41, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

== Represent the Good Side (posted on Andy's wall, too) ==

I think the articles gives too little credit for good things that Planned Parenthood does. I have many friends (who have never had sex) who use Planned Parenthood for cheaper birth control pills, to regulate their hormones and control what would otherwise be excruciatingly painful cycles, if you know what I mean. They also use Planned Parenthood for annual gynecological exams at a discounted rate, since having a private practice doctor do the same exam is significantly more expensive. I think we can disagree about abortions, but I think women's health is an absolute positive, and something that Planned Parenthood does well. The article should say so.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 10:17, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
:The argument that would be made here is that the only reason the health-care and medicines are so cheap is that the abortions performed at PP subsidize everything else. In other words, a woman gets "gynecological exams at a discounted rate" because she's getting them at the expense of dead babies. In other ''other'' words there is no good at Planned Parenthood only ''less bad'' things. [[User:Rob Pommer| Cracker]][[User_talk:Rob_Pommer|talk]] 10:31, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
::If health care was cheaper in America, women wouldn't have to get cheaper health care at the "expense of dead babies". Personally, I'm all for planned parenthood(notice the lack of capitalization, I'm talking about the idea, not the organization), and I definitly like the idea of health care being more available to women. I don't believe in forcing others to believe what I believe, so I'm pro-choice. If a woman gets an abortion, it doesn't bother me, it doesn't effect me(in any way shape or form, try to tell me that God will smite me because I say this, I do believe the bible says to leave the judgement up to him, that's exactly what I'm doing). I'm not saying it's right, I'm saying it's not my decision, and it's not anyone else's either. The choice about whether or not having an abortion is right lies with the mother and the father of the unborn child, and only them. I apologize for the semi-rant.[[User:NSmyth|NSmyth]] 12:43, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

== Interesting ==

Interesting article, but it really should be named something like "controversial historical issues in PP" given that most of the content has absolutely nothing to do with the modern organization. I have a decent amount of contact with them, and their current organization is completely misrepresented here. It really is a travesty, but I'm not the one to fix it.--[[User:palmd001|PalMD]][[User_talk:palmd001|talk]] 10:30, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

:Indeed. Conservative, out of curiosity, do you genuinely believe that PP has more facilities in "ethnic schools" (as you called them) or neighborhoods as part of a strategy to reduce the number of minorities in the US? Besides the larger POV issue, this entry is not well written. [[User:Murray|Murray]] 11:40, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

==Advocacy==

PP does not simply "provide health services". It has positions and asserts them loudly.

Here is an example:

"Throughout the year, the federal government steps up its war on women and freedom of choice ... " [snip by Ed Poor for CP discussion]

* The U.S. State Department freezes $3 million in funding to the World Health Organization (WHO) in response to anti-choice objections to the WHO's Human Reproduction Program; HHS Web sites remove medically accurate information about condom effectiveness and the lack of a proven link between abortion and breast cancer; the HHS Secretary's Advisory Committee on Human Research Protection Charter gives embryos new status as "human subjects;" and "abstinence-only" proponent Dr. Alma Golden is named to oversee Title X, the nation's family planning program. [http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/who-we-are/2000-present-9929.htm]

This implies that they strongly oppose abstinence - a point 'fact-tagged' in the article recently. They use this bullet point as 'ammunition' in the 'war' over "women and freedom of choice".

This implies that they favor the POV of the United Nations, as the WHO is completely under UN control.

This accuses HHS of removing "medically accurate information about condom effectiveness", whatever that means. Looks like they advocate condom use for something - is it [[contraception]] and/or [[VD prevention]]? (Sorry about the archaic language, I don't think I'll ever make the switch to 'STD' - sounds like an oil additive.)

This asserts that there is no "proven link between abortion and breast cancer".

A whole bunch of interesting points to keep us busy in coming weeks. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 12:05, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

:There's an enormous difference between opposing abstinence and opposing abstinence-only sex ed. Are you sure they're referring to the former? [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 12:08, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

::It seems pretty clear that their opposition is to abstinence ''only'' sex ed. [[User:DrLib|DrLib]] 12:46, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Tsumetai, no, I'm not sure. That's what these discussion pages are for.

:::But I'm also not sure whether there's much difference between (1) opposing abstinence and (2) saying "abstinence would be better, but we don't really think you are capable of it, and since you're going to fornicate anyway, try (blank)". --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 12:49, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
::::It's closer to saying, "abstinence would be betterm but if you don't believe in the same things we do, and feel that you must fornicate, use (insert method of birth control here) in order to help keep yourselves from getting STIs and from becoming parents at such a young age."[[User:NSmyth|NSmyth]] 12:55, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

:::I think there's a big difference between the 2. And I suspect the attitude is more "here are some things you should know if you choose to have sex" rather than "because we don't think you can help yourselves." [[User:DrLib|DrLib]] 12:56, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

Ed, im not that younger than you, but no one uses VD anymore...get with the times man! Anyway, like I said, I work with them a lot, they have nothing against abstinence, just education that excludes things other than abstinence.--[[User:palmd001|PalMD]][[User_talk:palmd001|talk]] 12:51, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

And btw, to repost the link above, I really think that should clear things up, but what do I know...
http://plannedparenthood.org/birth-control-pregnancy/birth-control/continuous-abstinence.htm [[User:palmd001|PalMD]][[User_talk:palmd001|talk]] 12:53, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Planned Parenthood

2007-04-02T16:46:09Z

DrLib: /* Advocacy */

Marcus Ross

2007-04-02T16:40:58Z

DrLib: replaced "ref needed" with cite needed tag

'''Marcus S. Ross''' is a [[Young Earth Creationist]] (YEC) who was awarded a Ph.D. in geology by the [[University of Rhode Island]] in December 2006 AD.

Ross' receiving his doctorate, which was publicized in a ''[[New York Times]]'' article, raised eyebrows in the liberal academic community; as a group, liberals cannot understand why someone who openly believes that the earth is less than 10,000 years old could be judged an expert in earth science by fully qualified faculty.{{fact}}

However, it should be noted that his Ph.D., on the subject of [[mososaur]] distribution, did not contain any Creationist science.<ref>
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/12/science/12geologist.html?ex=1328936400&en=c3267d075279160b&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss</ref>

<references/>

Vice President of the United States of America

2007-03-29T23:20:23Z

DrLib:

The Vice President is first in the [[order of succession]] to the Presidency.

Vice Presidents have included:

{| class="wikitable"
|-
!Vice President
!Years
!State
!Party
!President(s)
|-
|1. [[John Adams]]
|1789-1797
|[[Massachusetts]]
|Federalist
|Washington
|-
|2. [[Thomas Jefferson]]
|1797-1801
|[[Virginia]]
|Democratic-Republican
|Adams
|-
|3. [[Aaron Burr]]
|1801-1805
|[[New York]]
|Democratic-Republican
|Jefferson
|-
|4. [[George Clinton]]
|1805-1812
|[[New York]]
|Democratic-Republican
|Jefferson, Madison
|-
|5. [[Elbridge Gerry]]
|1813-1814
|[[Massachusetts]]
|Democratic-Republican
|Madison
|-
|6. [[Daniel Tompkins]]
|1817-1825
|[[New York]]
|Democratic-Republican
|Monroe
|-
|7. [[John Calhoun]]
|1825-1832
|[[South Carolina]]
|Democratic-Republican, Democratic
|Adams, Jackson
|-
|8. [[Martin van Buren]]
|1833-1837
|[[New York]]
|Democratic
|Jackson
|-
|9. [[Richard Johnson]]
|1837-1841
|[[Kentucky]]
|Democratic
|van Buren
|-
|10. [[John Tyler]]
|1841
|[[Virginia]]
|Whig
|Harrison
|-
|11. [[George Dallas]]
|1845-1849
|[[Pennsylvania]]
|Democratic
|Polk
|-
|12. [[Millard Fillmore]]
|1849-1850
|[[New York]]
|Whig
|Taylor
|-
|13. [[William King]]
|1853
|[[Alabama]]
|Democratic
|Pierce
|-
|14. [[John Breckinridge]]
|1857-1861
|[[Kentucky]]
|Democratic
|Buchanan
|-
|15. [[Hannibal Hamlin]]
|1861-1865
|[[Maine]]
|Republican
|Lincoln
|-
|16. [[Andrew Johnson]]
|1865
|[[Tennessee]]
|Democratic
|Lincoln
|-
|17. [[Schuyler Colfax]]
|1869-1873
|[[Indiana]]
|Republican
|Grant
|-
|18. [[Henry Wilson]]
|1873-1875
|[[Massachusetts]]
|Republican
|Grant
|-
|19. [[William Wheeler]]
|1877-1881
|[[New York]]
|Republican
|Hayes
|-
|20. [[Chester Arthur]]
|1881
|[[New York]]
|Republican
|Garfield
|-
|21. [[Thomas Hendricks]]
|1885
|[[Indiana]]
|Democratic
|Cleveland
|-
|22. [[Levi Morton]]
|1889-1893
|[[New York]]
|Republican
|Harrison
|-
|23. [[Adlai Stevenson]]
|1893-1897
|[[Illinois]]
|Democratic
|Cleveland
|-
|24. [[Garret Hobart]]
|1897-1899
|[[New Jersey]]
|Republican
|McKinley
|-
|25. [[Theodore Roosevelt]]
|1901
|[[New York]]
|Republican
|McKinley
|-
|26. [[Charles Fairbanks]]
|1905-1909
|[[Indiana]]
|Republican
|Roosevelt
|-
|27. [[James Sherman]]
|1909-1912
|[[New York]]
|Republican
|Taft
|-
|28. [[Thomas Marshall]]
|1913-1921
|[[Indiana]]
|Democratic
|Wilson
|-
|29. [[Calvin Coolidge]]
|1921-1923
|[[Massachusetts]]
|Republican
|Harding
|-
|30. [[Charles Dawes]]
|1925-1929
|[[Illinois]]
|Republican
|Coolidge
|-
|31. [[Charles Curtis]]
|1929-1933
|[[Kansas]]
|Republican
|Hoover
|-
|32. [[John Nance Garner]]
|1933-1941
|[[Texas]]
|Democratic
|Roosevelt
|-
|33. [[Henry Wallace]]
|1941-1945
|[[Iowa]]
|Democratic
|Roosevelt
|-
|34. [[Harold Truman]]
|1945
|[[Missouri]]
|Democratic
|Roosevelt
|-
|35. [[Alban Barkley]]
|1949-1953
|[[Kentucky]]
|Democratic
|Truman
|-
|36. [[Richard Nixon]]
|1953-1961
|[[California]]
|Republican
|Eisenhower
|-
|37. [[Lyndon Johnson]]
|1961-1963
|[[Texas]]
|Democratic
|Kennedy
|-
|38. [[Hubert Humphrey]]
|1965-1969
|[[Minnesota]]
|Democratic
|Johnson
|-
|39. [[Spiro Agnew]]
|1969-1973
|[[Maryland]]
|Republican
|Nixon
|-
|40. [[Gerald Ford]]
|1973-1974
|[[Michigan]]
|Republican
|Nixon
|-
|41. [[Nelson Rockefeller]]
|1974-1977
|[[New York]]
|Republican
|Ford
|-
|42. [[Walter Mondale]]
|1977-1981
|[[Minnesota]]
|Democratic
|Carter
|-
|43. [[George H. W. Bush]]
|1981-1989
|[[Texas}}
|Republican
|Reagan
|-
|44. [[Dan Quayle]]
|1989-1993
|[[Indiana]]
|Republican
|Bush
|-
|45. [[Al Gore]]
|1993-2001
|[[Tennessee]]
|Democratic
|Clinton
|-
|46. [[Dick Cheney]]
|2001-
|[[Wyoming]]
|Republican
|Bush
|}

[[Category:Politics]]

Vice President of the United States of America

2007-03-29T22:54:35Z

DrLib:

The Vice President is first in the order of succession to the Presidency.

Vice Presidents have included:

{| class="wikitable"
|-
1. [[John Adams]], 1789-1797 
2. [[Thomas Jefferson]], 1797-1801 
3. [[Aaron Burr]], 1801-1805 
4. [[George Clinton]], 1805-1812 
5. [[Elbridge Gerry]], 1813-1814 
6. [[Daniel Tompkins]], 1817-1825 
7. [[John Calhoun]], 1825-1832 
8. [[Martin van Buren]], 1833-1837 
9. [[Richard Johnson]], 1837-1841 
10. [[John Tyler]], 1841 
11. [[George Dallas]], 1845-1849 
12. [[Millard Fillmore]], 1849-1850 
13. [[William King]], 1853 
14. [[John Breckinridge]], 1857-1861 
15. [[Hannibal Hamlin]], 1861-1865 
16. [[Andrew Johnson]], 1865 
17. [[Schuyler Colfax]], 1869-1873 
18. [[Henry Wilson]], 1873-1875 
19. [[William Wheeler]], 1877-1881 
20. [[Chester Arthur]], 1881 
21. [[Thomas Hendricks]], 1885 
22. [[Levi Morton]], 1889-1893 
23. [[Adlai Stevenson]], 1893-1897 
24. [[Garret Hobart]], 1897-1899 
25. [[Theodore Roosevelt]], 1901 
26. [[Charles Fairbanks]], 1905-1909 
27. [[James Sherman]], 1909-1912 
28. [[Thomas Marshall]], 1913-1921 
29. [[Calvin Coolidge]], 1921-1923 
30. [[Charles Dawes]], 1925-1929 
31. [[Charles Curtis]], 1929-1933 
32. [[John Nance Garner]], 1933-1941 
33. [[Henry Wallace]], 1941-1945 
34. [[Harold Truman]], 1945 
35. [[Alban Barkley]], 1949-1953 
36. [[Richard Nixon]], 1953-1961 
37. [[Lyndon Johnson]], 1961-1963 
38. [[Hubert Humphrey]], 1965-1969 
39. [[Spiro Agnew]], 1969-1973 
40. [[Gerald Ford]], 1973-1974 
41. [[Nelson Rockefeller]], 1974-1977 
42. [[Walter Mondale]], 1977-1981 
43. [[George H. W. Bush]], 1981-1989 
44. [[Dan Quayle]], 1989-1993 
45. [[Al Gore]], 1993-2001 
46. [[Dick Cheney]], 2001-
|}

[[Category:Politics]]

Vice President of the United States of America

2007-03-29T22:53:03Z

DrLib:

The Vice President is first in the order of succession to the Presidency.

Vice Presidents have included:

1. [[John Adams]], 1789-1797 
2. [[Thomas Jefferson]], 1797-1801 
3. [[Aaron Burr]], 1801-1805 
4. [[George Clinton]], 1805-1812 
5. [[Elbridge Gerry]], 1813-1814 
6. [[Daniel Tompkins]], 1817-1825 
7. [[John Calhoun]], 1825-1832 
8. [[Martin van Buren]], 1833-1837 
9. [[Richard Johnson]], 1837-1841 
10. [[John Tyler]], 1841 
11. [[George Dallas]], 1845-1849 
12. [[Millard Fillmore]], 1849-1850 
13. [[William King]], 1853
14. [[John Breckinridge]], 1857-1861 
15. [[Hannibal Hamlin]], 1861-1865 
16. [[Andrew Johnson]], 1865 
17. [[Schuyler Colfax]], 1869-1873 
18. [[Henry Wilson]], 1873-1875 
19. [[William Wheeler]], 1877-1881 
20. [[Chester Arthur]], 1881 
21. [[Thomas Hendricks]], 1885 
22. [[Levi Morton]], 1889-1893 
23. [[Adlai Stevenson]], 1893-1897 
24. [[Garret Hobart]], 1897-1899 
25. [[Theodore Roosevelt]], 1901 
26. [[Charles Fairbanks]], 1905-1909 
27. [[James Sherman]], 1909-1912 
28. [[Thomas Marshall]], 1913-1921 
29. [[Calvin Coolidge]], 1921-1923 
30. [[Charles Dawes]], 1925-1929 
31. [[Charles Curtis]], 1929-1933 
32. [[John Nance Garner]], 1933-1941 
33. [[Henry Wallace]], 1941-1945 
34. [[Harold Truman]], 1945 
35. [[Alban Barkley]], 1949-1953 
36. [[Richard Nixon]], 1953-1961 
37. [[Lyndon Johnson]], 1961-1963 
38. [[Hubert Humphrey]], 1965-1969 
39. [[Spiro Agnew]], 1969-1973 
40. [[Gerald Ford]], 1973-1974 
41. [[Nelson Rockefeller]], 1974-1977 
42. [[Walter Mondale]], 1977-1981 
43. [[George H. W. Bush]], 1981-1989 
44. [[Dan Quayle]], 1989-1993 
45. [[Al Gore]], 1993-2001 
46. [[Dick Cheney]], 2001-

[[Category:Politics]]

The Pentagon

2007-03-29T21:46:28Z

DrLib: stub

'''The Pentagon''' is a five-sided military compound and headquarters of the United States Department of Defense. It is located just north of Washington, D.C in Arlington, Virginia. It is home to the offices of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secretary of Defense, and the Joint Terrorism Task Force. During the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, hijackers crashed American Airlines Flight 77 into the west side of the Pentagon. The crash damaged three of the five sides of the Pentagon. Because the affected area was under renovation at the time, several offices were unoccupied, sparing many lives. The Pentagon has since been repaired and the first workers whose offices were damaged in the attack began moving back in on August 15, 2002, nearly a month ahead of schedule.

[[Category:United States]]
[[Category:Military]]

{{stub}}

Same-sex marriage

2007-03-29T20:35:40Z

DrLib:

'''Same-sex marriage''' is a legal contract (i.e. one typically formalized by filing papers at a government office) in which the two people being married are of the same sex. It gives these couples the same legal rights and status as married opposite-sex couples.

Unheard of a few decades ago, same-sex marriage is one of a number of issues involving gay rights and the "culture wars." Traditionally, in the United States, marriage has been considered to be one of the areas governed by each state rather than by the Federal Government, and marriage laws are a patchwork whose details are different in each state. The possibility of same-sex marriage in each state depends on that state's constitution.

In 1996 Congress recognized the likelihood that same-sex marriage would soon become legal in at least some states, and was concerned that the Constitution might be interpreted as forcing states that did not allow it to recognize marriages performed in states that did allow it. It passed the Defense of Marriage act, which prevents this possibility, and also prevents the Federal Government from recognizing same-sex marriages.

In 1999 a Vermont court ruled that under Vermont's constitution, it was not required to allow same-sex marriage but was required to make provisions to grant same-sex couples legal rights identical to those provided by marriage. Vermont responded by creating "civil unions," which are legally distinct from "marriages" but convey the same rights. As of 2007, Connecticut and New Jersey also provide civil unions. In 2003 the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that under Massachusetts' constitution, same-sex couples could not be denied Massachusetts marriage licenses, making Massachusetts the sole state to allow opposite-sex marriage.<ref>Because of an established Massachusetts law, Massachusetts same-sex marriages are all-but-limited to Massachusetts residents. The law says that an out-of-state couple cannot be married if their marriage would be illegal in their home state.</ref>

The religious ceremony of marriage is governed by each denomination and is unaffected by laws passed by civil authority. Same-sex marriage is forbidden in Orthodox Judaism, Catholicism, and most mainstream Protestant denominations. Thus, even in Massachusetts, it would be close to impossible for a same-sex couple to find a Catholic priest willing to marry them in a church, or an Orthodox rabbi willing to marry them in a temple.

Public attitude toward same-sex marriage parallels attitude toward homosexuality. In general, it is opposed by social conservatives, and most of the support for it is from liberals.

Same-sex marriages are allowed in [[Canada]], the [[Netherlands]], [[Belgium]], [[South Africa]], [[Monaco]], [[Spain]], [[Cayman Islands]], [[Greenland]], [[Netherland Antilles]], [[Turks and Caicos Islands]], [[United States]] ([[Massachusetts]]), [[Pitcairn Island]], [[French Guiana]], [[Falkland Islands]].

[[Israel]] approves of same-sex marriges performed abroad, but does not perform them in the country.

Same-sex unions or registered partnerships are allowed in [[Hungary]] (from July 2007), [[Andorra]], [[Italy]9 (some regions), [[Luxembourg]], [[the Czech Republic]], [[Denmark]], [[Finland]], [[Germany]], [[Iceland]], [[Norway]], [[Portugal]], [[Slovenia]], [[Sweden]], [[Switzerland]], [[France]], [[United Kingdom]], [[Martinique]], [[Guadeloupe]], [[United States]] ([[Vermont]], [[Connecticut]], [[New Jersey]], [[California]], [[Maine]], [[District of Coumbia]] and [[Hawaii]]), [[Mexico]] ([[Mexico City]] and [[Coahuila]]), [[Australia]] and [[Norfolk Island]], [[New Caledonia]], [[New Zealand]], [[Brazil]] ([[Rio Grande do Sul]]), [[Argentina]] ([[Buenos Aires City]] and [[Rio Negro Privince]]).

Same-sex unions are considered in [[Hong-Kong]], [[Philippines]], [[Taiwan]], [[Austria]], [[Faroe Islands]], [[Gibraltar]], [[Greece]], [[Gernsey]], [[Ireland]], [[Isle of Man]], [[Jersey]], [[Lichtenstein]], [[Poland]], [[Bermuda]], [[Costa Rica]], [[New Caledonia]], [[Chile]], [[Colombia]], [[Uruguay]].<ref>Homosexuality laws of the world[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_laws_of_the_world]</ref>

==Reference==

<references/>

Northern Ireland

2007-03-29T17:00:14Z

DrLib: added detail much more needed

Northern Ireland is a country that is a member of the [[United Kingdom]], which also includes [[England]], [[Scotland]], and [[Wales]]. Geographically, Northern Ireland occupies the northern portion of the island of [[Ireland]], with the Republic of Ireland occupying the remainder of the island.

== Early Years ==

Northern Ireland was created by the Anglo-Irish Treaty of 1922, which formally concluded the Irish War of Independence. It was governed from [[Stormont]] Castle in [[Belfast]], and both Catholics and Protestants debated their membership. During this time, MP's would travel to and from the Houses of Parliament where they served on Her Majesty's Government. However, a minority on both sides of the Irish border refused to accept the partition of Ireland and continued to fight the British, largely with terrorist activities.

The most important group in this regard has been the [[Irish Republican Army]], commonly known as the [[IRA]]. The IRA was originally formed to fight the British during the War of Independence. Many IRA members refused to accept the Anglo-Irish treaty's partition of the island into two separate countries, leading to the bloody Irish Civil War of 1922-23, in which pro-treaty forces were victorious. However, the anti-treaty forces continued to refer to themselves as the IRA after the civil war concluded, and to consider themselves the legitimate government of Ireland{{fact}}.

The government of Northern Ireland has been widely criticized for anti-Catholic policies, particularly during its first 40 years{{fact}}. The country's first prime minister, [[James Craig]], once famously described it as "a Protestant parliament and a Protestant state."<ref>Bardon, J. (1992). A History of Ulster. The Blackstaff Press, Belfast, pp. 539.</ref>

== Civil Rights Movement ==

During the late 1960s, partially inspired by the civil rights movement in the [[United States]], Northern Ireland Catholics began to protest against discrimination. Protests were initially led by the [[Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association]], or NICRA, which was founded in January 1967. NICRA's demands included repeal of the Special Powers Act, the end of the paramilitary B Specials police force, an end to the gerrymandering in local elections, and an end to discrimination in terms of government housing and government employment.

Protests typically took the form of marches or other demonstrations. One of the most important protests took place on January 1, 1969, when a group from the student People's Democracy organization organized a march from Belfast to Derry, intended to imitate [[Martin Luther King, Jr.]]'s marches from Selma to Montgomery. The march was repeatedly attacked by unionists (those wishing for Northern Ireland to remain in the United Kingdom), including off-duty policemen. The most intense violence occurred at Burntollet Bridge, where the marchers were attacked by 200 unionists while police did little to intervene.

== The Troubles ==

== References ==
<references/>