Governments enforce morality all the time. Its illegal to kill, right? Steal? Next.
The idea is to give free birth control(documented and installed by a physician) in High schools, etc, to everyone who wishes to have it. Make it a very visible and assessable program. Then say this: Those who have documented birth control, or can prove it, are allowed to have abortions: Meaning: Those who got pregnant while on birth control.
These doctor installed birth control can be 99.9% effective, and do not depend on using the product correctly.
This could have a huge impact on unwanted pregnancies, and subsequently, the number of abortions.
Of course, I agree wholeheartedly. Researchers could speak of it all they want, but doing so may jeopardize their chances of being published. Journals like to have the first press release.
I happen to be a memory researcher at a major University. I also happen to be on a project very similar to the one in the article. However, we are doing the fMRI imaging with children of different ages, as a developmental study. We also piloted adults, and replicating results similar to the ones in the article. Interesting. Of course, I cannot speak about the research in much detail. Journals don't like that much.
As to your question, I could tell you a lot about why this is so. 1st, cued recall is much easier than free recall. The cue helps stimulate the appropriate associative networks facilitating recall. In particular, a primary focus of mine is cued recall, or recognition. I use the dual process model of recognition: Recollection and Familiarity.
Familiarity, as experienced, is the feeling of familiarity we get when we see something that we've seen before, aside from actually remembering anything about it, which is recollection.
I highly recommend the seminal: Yonelinas. A.P. (2002). The nature of recollection and familiarity: A review of 30 years of research. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 441-517.
Welfare agencies do it RIGHT NOW. They don't give more aid for children who are conceived while on welfare unless you have proof from a doctor of being on the birth control.
Most of these birth control methods require a doctor to "install." So there is a record of it available. As for your second objection: Require the same proof that the welfare office does. A record from your doctor.
Thank you. Indeed, I do see the strengths of pro-abortion supporters, however the pro-life argument is not as weak as it is made out to be.
Besides, a moderate approach would be to acknowledge that the issue is unclear, or unsolvable, and that it is probably best to error on the side of caution. Even better would be to fund the research of technologies and legislation which can make these issues less relevant.
For example, let's develop several pre-conception birth control methods which are highly effective. Then require their use in-order to have the privilege of having an abortion. --Like insurance for your car. Responsibility allows the privilege. Plus make this freely available and highly accessible to people of child baring age.
Advantages:
1. Reduces unwanted pregnancies.
2. Reduces abortions.
3. Re-frames the debate into a more moderate direction, so as to divide our country less.
Seriously, this is not a scientific question, but a moral/ philosophical question. There IS room for debate. However, as a promising source of embryonic stem cells, this discovery may reduce the importance of the debate. I think that the abortion debate in general should be solved in this way. Make the debate less important by solving the problem of unwanted pregnancies directly with good birth control.
Slashdot Mirror
Part list: 1 light bulb, 1 solar cell plate, a really bright flashlight.
Bush's Brain.
Stop Dreaming Homer. Its Not A Donut.
What about evolution?
Its more like inviting someone over to live at your house, and shooting them because you got tired of them.
Its like patient dumping on skid row.
The idea is to give free birth control(documented and installed by a physician) in High schools, etc, to everyone who wishes to have it. Make it a very visible and assessable program. Then say this: Those who have documented birth control, or can prove it, are allowed to have abortions: Meaning: Those who got pregnant while on birth control.
These doctor installed birth control can be 99.9% effective, and do not depend on using the product correctly.
This could have a huge impact on unwanted pregnancies, and subsequently, the number of abortions.
Yes. http://psycinfo2.apa.org/psycarticles/welcome and pubmed.. This assumes you have access to a University Library with access to these databases.
Consolidation during REM. There isn't much in the literature. For that matter, consolidation is on shaky ground itself.
Of course, I agree wholeheartedly. Researchers could speak of it all they want, but doing so may jeopardize their chances of being published. Journals like to have the first press release.
No. Sorry.
As to your question, I could tell you a lot about why this is so. 1st, cued recall is much easier than free recall. The cue helps stimulate the appropriate associative networks facilitating recall. In particular, a primary focus of mine is cued recall, or recognition. I use the dual process model of recognition: Recollection and Familiarity.
Familiarity, as experienced, is the feeling of familiarity we get when we see something that we've seen before, aside from actually remembering anything about it, which is recollection.
I highly recommend the seminal: Yonelinas. A.P. (2002). The nature of recollection and familiarity: A review of 30 years of research. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 441-517.
You can get it here: http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/labs/Yonelinas/index _files/page0003.htm
Wow. The majority of this article's discussion are children of my -1 troll first post. Not bad, I'd say. Give his some mod points.
The pill wouldn't qualify: The chance for error is too great, and documentation too difficult.
Most of these birth control methods require a doctor to "install." So there is a record of it available. As for your second objection: Require the same proof that the welfare office does. A record from your doctor.
yet, in absolute numbers, it is less a problem than we have today.
This is why making the birth control very accessible and free to everyone is essential. Put it into the high schools, etc.
Besides, a moderate approach would be to acknowledge that the issue is unclear, or unsolvable, and that it is probably best to error on the side of caution. Even better would be to fund the research of technologies and legislation which can make these issues less relevant.
For example, let's develop several pre-conception birth control methods which are highly effective. Then require their use in-order to have the privilege of having an abortion. --Like insurance for your car. Responsibility allows the privilege. Plus make this freely available and highly accessible to people of child baring age.
Advantages:
1. Reduces unwanted pregnancies.
2. Reduces abortions.
3. Re-frames the debate into a more moderate direction, so as to divide our country less.
4. Makes the whole issue less pressing.
Thank you for your feedback
Looks like your site got nuked from space. --
??? Irrelevant. The advocacy of others does not imply a weakness in my argument.
Seriously, this is not a scientific question, but a moral/ philosophical question. There IS room for debate. However, as a promising source of embryonic stem cells, this discovery may reduce the importance of the debate. I think that the abortion debate in general should be solved in this way. Make the debate less important by solving the problem of unwanted pregnancies directly with good birth control.
Downside: Now we can clone Cowboy Neal by sampling his keyboard.
I knew there was a better way than using dead babies.
Perhaps this should be tagged: flamewar!
There, I've made my claim, and chosen my CS religion.