Jump to content


Regular Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Daffodil last won the day on November 21 2018

Daffodil had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,276 Wow

1 Follower

About Daffodil

  • Rank
  • Birthday 10/26/1967

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Family, walking/hiking, reading, psychology, simple living, minimalism
  • More About Me
    Easygoing, in awe of nature, insatiably curious, politically independent

Previous Fields

  • Still have any Gods? If so, who or what?

Recent Profile Visitors

1,700 profile views
  1. And while I'm at it, immigration is how this planet got populated by our species. It was, is, and always will be present as overpopulation combined with climate change will continue to lead people to move in order to better their circumstances, and the temperate areas of this planet, where most first world nations reside, will continue to be the most desirable. I see the issues that illegal immigration bring to ANY country that experiences it, but it is here to stay and we need to figure out how to manage it. America in 100 years is not going to look like America right now. Those of you with 1950's dreams of how it "used" to be in the "good old days" need to open your eyes and learn to live in a different world. ETA: I am actually actively learning Spanish, FWIW.
  2. I'm fully independent politically, but during the last election, even the third party candidates were crap. However, I agree with you and believe that one of two possible futures lay ahead. Either more and more people will quit the two-party system and create a viable third party, or flat out rebellion will occur with all the accompanying violence. Hope it's the former and not the latter, but we may not be able to last as a functioning nation long enough for a third party to become viable. I just watched a video by The Houndog about how we are all being distracted and redirected to fighting with each other rather than fighting against the real enemy - the wealthy corporatists. Keep us focused on racism, sexism, trans issues, etc. and they can keep their status quo of increasing their wealth while the rest of us stagnate and deteriorate. I know it sounds like conspiracy theory, but I'm becoming more and more convinced that this is what the real problem in the world today is.
  3. We’re not voting because we never have any good candidates anymore. We all know what’s really happening behind every successful candidate (loads of promises to the powers that be), and we’ve lost hope that anything can be done. Trump was elected less because people liked him and more because he represented a move away from the status quo. Now on the left, it’s people like AOC that are moving away from the DNC’s status quo. Any traditional Democrat that tries to run has a snowball’s chance in hell of winning the nomination. Of course their ideas are so outrageously radical (no air travel at all!?) that they can’t win the rest of the nation and trump will win again.
  4. I believe people born in America are automatically citizens, which is part of the problem. If we changed the laws so that each person is a citizen of the country their parents are from, they would be less likely to want to have their babies here. I know there is a long complicated history behind that law, though. ETA: I’m not opposed to immigration as long as it’s legal. I’m appalled though at the stories coming out saying that these people currently on the border were told by someone in their countries that we would happily take them in and provide them with job training, etc. Somebody down there is selling these poor people a bill of goods.
  5. This whole thing just frustrates me. It usually comes down to the Right to Life people vs. everybody else. But right to what kind of life? Don't let a fetus be aborted, but also don't support the woman who you have now forced to be a mother, leaving the baby with a potentially crappy life. Don't let a suffering person end their suffering, leaving them to continue suffering right until the end. All of these because "life is precious". Let's be honest here - some life is precious and some life is pure misery. It is not for anyone else to dictate to others what kind of life they have. Jesus! It's late, I'm tired and menopausal and really need to shut up. Good night!
  6. Another problem is the freedom with which people use the word depression. "I'm so depressed" often really means boredom, loneliness, frustration, grief. Actual clinical depression is something else all together. My point, though, to go back to the OP, is that I can totally see someone with acute, difficult to treat depression (or other types of severe mental illness) wanting to end their suffering permanently. There have been times where I have been off meds and felt close to that. Unless you've experienced it, it's really hard to help someone understand how that feels. Something similar to that is a story I watched on assisted euthanasia where a man married with young children had severe migraine headaches that left him writhing in pain for days. Doctors either could not find anything wrong with him or could not effectively treat it (can't remember which) and he was getting to the point where if nothing more could be done, he was seriously considering ending it. As I recall, by the end of the program he was going in for another experimental exam or treatment, but was still keeping suicide as an option if this last effort did not work. So again, what I am trying to say , is that in neither of these cases is the condition terminal but the effects of the condition are so detrimental to the sufferer's life that one has to consider how much suffering we are willing to force people to endure. No easy answers, of course, because the cure for anything could be right around the corner, but who has the right to look a suffering person in the face and tell them they just have to endure until that "someday" comes?
  7. A safeguard like that won’t stop some people from harassing their elderly relatives. I wonder if a law would have to be passed making that kind of pressure illegal as well. For me, I think it is logical. If someone is suffering and there is no help for it - no drugs or treatments to relieve it and no hope for a cure soon enough to save them - then they should have the right to decide how long they have to suffer. The concern is mental illness and having suffered depression for many years (but controlled well with meds), I know there are times when the psychic pain is nearly unbearable. It’s not a physical pain like a headache, but it is still pain. If that pain cannot be treated by meds, then it is chronic pain like any other and needs to be treated as such. There are mental illnesses that are so severe they are difficult to treat and the drugs used to treat them have significant side effects. So my question is, when is the mental illness a mental illness and when is it a biological illness/disease like heart disease or cancer? After all, the brain is an organ too, and can malfunction just as any other. You wouldn’t tell a heart patient that they just need to go to counseling to “fix” their disease. Why do we expect people with broken brains to go to counseling to fix what is essentially a biological problem? Sorry, that was longer than I intended and went off topic.
  8. Great, that means he's got an MLM opportunity he thinks I might be interested in.
  9. I feel triggered . . . But I don’t know what’s triggering me!
  10. Ok, this does clarify things a bit and as I am ok with first trimester abortion, it makes sense that if a woman is not allowed to do it early, she’s left with doing it later, but here’s the thing. There are plenty of laws that people don’t like, but they have to obey them because they are laws. Yes this is extra hardship on the woman, but she can still give up the baby to loving parents at the end and never see that baby again if she doesn't want to. It would have been far far easier on both of my kids’ BCs if they had chosen to abort than go on with the pregnancy. And they both could have gotten abortions if they wanted to. And as to infants who are so deformed as to die during or shortly after birth, how is killing them in the womb a better option? The fetus doesn’t magically disappear - the woman still has to deliver the corpse, so what is the benefit? Rather than introduce a law that is abhorrent no matter how you look at it, how about doubling down on making sure abortion in the first trimester stays available. There will always be rare occurrences, but those should be dealt with exactly as they are - rare occurrences.
  11. Both of my kids were adopted from birth. In both cases we met the birth moms about a month before they delivered. In one case, the BM has seen her BC since and it is a positive beneficial relationship for both. In the other, because of the circumstances surrounding the conception (not rape or incest, just complicated), she has not seen her BC since we took him home. He does, however, have a relationship with his birth father. The birth mother CAN have a relationship with her BC if she wants to but does not HAVE to have one. I can think of no reason under the sun why any woman would “need” to have a pregnancy terminated at the very end! I know there are rare occurrences when a woman does not know she is pregnant until she goes into labor, but again, she doesn’t have to keep the baby, so WHY!?!?!?!! What is really going on here? Are these people secretly looking for a way to control population? I just don’t get it. Newborns are the most sought after children for adoption. We were told it could take up to two years before we would get called, and we put no limitations on sex or race. We were lucky and only waited one year each time. I really have no issue with abortion when done in the first trimester, but after that, I just can’t fathom it.
  12. Ok, let's give him the benefit of the doubt. It does sound as if he was referring to a situation where the infant is in such bad shape that it is likely to die within a short period of time anyway. So what is there to "discuss"? I would presume the natural response would be to either A) perform some extreme life-sustaining procedures which would likely be useless but would give the parents the feeling that at least they tried or B)let it die naturally. If that is what he was getting at, he should have made that a bit clearer. I'm not sure that's what he meant, though.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.