Karen wrote: Furthermore, I teach in California and haven't heard of Al Shealy at CSU. I Googled his name and did not find a direct reference to him or to any affiliation with CSU.
Al responds: Let the witch hunt begin! Have you heard the news? 49 other states have been admitted to the union. It was in all the papers. I've posted an affiliation on TIPS before. Since you like googling, I'll let you keep going. The fact that my affiliation matters to you reveals a lot. Then she wrote: Finally, although I'm strongly prochoice and teach human sexuality, I am concerned about how to appropriately handle this topic in a general education class. I'm also wondering how this new National Geographic video will be received by the public. Al responds again: The reason you are "concerned about how to appropriately handle this topic" is because you have a conscience. You decide whether you use it. Finally she wrote: The ANTI CHOICE advocates have successfully framed the debate by repeatedly using the term "antiabortion" instead of antichoice," And Al responds: If you honestly believe this, you are insane. They use the term "antiabortion" because they are against abortion. I wish I could remember the book I read a few years ago (written by a prochoice leader). They explained that the use of the word "choice" was a very carefully planned strategic move. "Pro choice" sounds good. Any one who is not "pro choice" must be "anti choice" and therefore evil. It was the "pro choice" crowd that framed the entire debate. In fact, the true issue at stake is whether that mass of cells is in fact a "life" deserving of protection. If it's not, you ought to be able to choose to do whatever you wish to it. If it is, you shouldn't have the right. So the heart of the issue is not choice, it's the definition of life. But even college professors with Ph.D.s have been infected by the framing of the "pro choice" crowd. Al --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
