HOME | DD

lilithdesade In reply to MissouriFangirl7789 [2012-02-19 07:44:16 +0000 UTC]

Thanks for the comment.

I think it's great that there are places willing to help women with unplanned pregnancies. What I don't agree with is these places using a women's crisis as a platform to preach their religion. It's just unethical .

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

lilithdesade In reply to MauEvig [2012-02-19 07:50:30 +0000 UTC]

Like, I've said in almost every comment that seeks to voice their opinion, I'm not really up for debate as it's pretty much all been said in the past.

One point you make though, begs correcting; aside from you equating child birth with damage, (when the reality is your body is completely capable and amazingly strong) the notion that because some people have bad lives that they should die or not ever have lived is so so short sighted it's laughable. Simply because one faces strife, does not negate their right to live. Life is a basic right and different variables, do not change that right.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

MauEvig In reply to lilithdesade [2012-02-19 15:29:00 +0000 UTC]

Except perhaps those who wish they were aborted. I'm not saying that once they are born that we should kill off the homeless or people who do have bad lives. But their lives wouldn't be bad in the first place if they were aborted would they? Think about it. We'd have less children in the world suffering and starving. They die eventually anyway, and considering they can't feel pain during the first 2 trimesters to me it's showing mercy to abort.
I'm not planning to have kids because my family has always been poor, struggled with money, and not to mention have serious emotional issues. Would it really be fair to bring a child into that? Of course not! Even if I was more financially stable it wouldn't change the emotional baggage my family has.
Of course, we all have a basic right to life. The question is, who's life are we protecting? The difference is you want to protect the baby's rights and I want to protect the woman's rights.
Also, child birth does cause damage. There's a reason why women will die giving birth, and the vagina is never quite the same afterwards. It some cases women have to have surgery after giving birth because of the damage it does to their organs.
But hey, I heard this from an actual Doctor. So regardless of whether or not you want to take me seriously is up to you. After all, you didn't want to debate it, but unless the comments are disabled, what's going to stop people from voicing their opinion?

Again, I do agree with you on the contraceptives. I think abortion should only be a last resort.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

justforfungirl In reply to MauEvig [2013-08-23 00:06:49 +0000 UTC]

May I ask why you think abortion should only be a last resort? 

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

MauEvig In reply to justforfungirl [2013-08-23 01:38:55 +0000 UTC]

Because if the contraceptives worked, then you never got pregnant to begin with, so there's no need to get an abortion if you're not pregnant.

I don't recommend using abortion as a primary means of birth control, since it can be costly and difficult to obtain. But if contraceptives fail and you still get pregnant, then that's where abortion is necessary.

I hope that clarifies it.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

lilithdesade In reply to galaxy4736 [2012-01-07 05:44:31 +0000 UTC]

Thank you so much for your comment! You are right, birth control is not 100% effective. For sexually active people though, using any form of birth control is better than using none and that is the message I really wanted to convey; promoting responsibility with sexual activity. If you're not abstaining from sex, then it's a moot point, but for all those who do have sex, making the best choices possible is what I'm all about. Thanks again for your well spoken piece!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

lilithdesade In reply to Master-of-the-Boot [2011-11-07 17:26:03 +0000 UTC]

Instead of praying, actual doing usually works better. But yea, I hope the need for women to kill their young in order to "save themselves" comes soon.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Master-of-the-Boot In reply to lilithdesade [2011-11-07 21:03:00 +0000 UTC]

People need to be educated about contraceptives, planned parenthood and given reasonable chance to provide for their children if they desire to keep it.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

lilithdesade In reply to Master-of-the-Boot [2011-11-15 17:54:27 +0000 UTC]

I agree.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

lilithdesade In reply to YuYuAmie [2011-10-26 07:56:00 +0000 UTC]

Unfortunately, it's not always so simple. Women have sex and even with birth control sometimes get pregnant. There's nothing wrong with having sex and I'm not about vilifying that. What is wrong is how we treat women when they are pregnant/become mothers and how we don't offer enough sex education and birth control to people who need it.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

DragonOfEvil In reply to Dylan-the-dude [2015-08-08 04:54:42 +0000 UTC]

I both agree and disagree with this statement.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

lilithdesade In reply to Dylan-the-dude [2011-08-09 05:39:39 +0000 UTC]

Condoms a very close second.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

lilithdesade In reply to roseliza2 [2011-01-11 04:39:38 +0000 UTC]

The rate at which an unborn child grows is VERY amazing and so is their cognitive ability in the womb. I personally don't believe in a god so I don't see how that plays into abortion but a respect for life generally transcends belief systems.

Physically, abortion is about as dangerous as child birth for the mother, but always deadly for the child.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

lilithdesade In reply to NotAFake [2010-04-13 09:24:07 +0000 UTC]

Well, isn't that unfortunate to have a junkie for a parent. Pretty sure no one ever overcame that. Death is certainly a better fate that having bad parents. A++

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

NotAFake In reply to lilithdesade [2010-04-13 16:47:55 +0000 UTC]

Pretty hard to overcome it in the scenario I just described. Pay attention.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

lilithdesade In reply to NotAFake [2010-04-14 03:32:17 +0000 UTC]

"Pretty hard to overcome" does not translate into insurmountable. Life is full of hard situations. Stop acting like a snarky bitch, as it's not conducive to an intellectual dialogue.

Also, pay attention to "Heavy critique of the ART is encouraged, critique of the message is not.
I've heard it all and debated it all and have no desire to do so here."

So I'm pretty much done with you.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

NotAFake In reply to lilithdesade [2010-04-14 03:43:56 +0000 UTC]

I'm not talking about challenges in life, I'm talking about stupid junkie parents literally KILLING their kids. Please, how is that a hard situation that is not insurmountable? Your being so fucking obtuse, I have to wonder if you were dropped on your head.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

razz93 In reply to Fighter-Pilot-Fox [2009-05-06 23:34:08 +0000 UTC]

Why do you have to choose one life over the other? Can't you choose both?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Fighter-Pilot-Fox In reply to razz93 [2009-05-06 23:54:15 +0000 UTC]

Nope, because mine's more important

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

razz93 In reply to Fighter-Pilot-Fox [2009-05-08 01:20:07 +0000 UTC]

I don't understand.

Even if you were more important, why would you kill unnecessarily?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Fighter-Pilot-Fox In reply to razz93 [2009-05-09 16:18:39 +0000 UTC]

I don't see it as unnecessarily.
I'd prefer not to screw up my life and waste my hard-earned money on some parasite. Also, the adoption system isn't as great as everyone makes it out to be. Not to mention, I wouldn't want to go through 9 months of pure hell and then have my body go through child-birth of all things. I'd rather take the easy way out and get rid of it as soon as possible. Being pregnant is one hell of a handicap for a fighter pilot, and even after I refuse to sacrifice MY career and MY ambitions for a kid I never wanted to have in the first place. It's an easy way out, no pregnancy, no child-birth, no pain in my ass.

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

karenjade In reply to Fighter-Pilot-Fox [2010-02-05 03:42:19 +0000 UTC]

I have to agree with you there FPF! I think if anti-choicers really cared about women and women's issues then they wouldn't imply they should be punished for sex by being forced to carry pregnancies against their will.

- Planned Parenthood was created to help women and their families and
educate about birth control. And whether Margaret Sanger was racist or not has no bearing on the ethics of abortion. She was also a big proponent of
contraception--does that make condoms evil?
Anti-choicers always use that racism kkk nazi argument, but the fact is
it was praised and supported by even Dr. Martin Luther King Jr for it's aid to minorities. Was he bigotted against African Americans too? And I have Jewish friends whose family members are holocaust survivors and guess what? they're pro-choice, are members of Planned Parenthood and Aleph, an organization that helps women in crisis, and have as good an education in womens issues as you claim to have. In fact they admires Dr. Gisela Perle,
who practiced abortion in Auschwitz to save women's lives and Henry Morgentaler, who was an Auschwitz survivor![link]
[link]
Dr. Morgantaler, an abortion provider who has been nominated to the highest Canadian honor for his work, survived Auschwitz and saw the horrors of man's
cruelty to man. Although not mentioned, it is likely he witnessed what
happened to pregnant women in the camps. He studied medicine and fought for the underdog, even going to prison in Canada. At that time, attempting to induce an abortion was a crime punishable by life in prison, or two years
imprisonment if the woman herself was convicted.
[link]

- All the women I've met who have had abortions felt a certain amount of
anguish over having to make the decision, but once they do decide and have the procedure done, the usual feeling is one of relief. The guilt, if any, is often the result of harrassment by opponents of abortion. Adoption works just fine for some women, and more power to them. But for others, the pregnancy itself is the problem. Our culture tends to idolize motherhood,
and puts an idyllic "public face" on pregnancy: the radiant, mother-to-be, basking in the contented bliss of her own fecundity. We don'tlike to think about this...
* exhaustion (weariness common from first weeks)
* altered appetite and senses of taste and smell
* nausea and vomiting (50% of women, first trimester)
* heartburn and indigestion
* constipation
* weight gain
* dizziness and light-headedness
* bloating, swelling, fluid retention
* hemmorhoids
* abdominal cramps
* yeast infections
* congested, bloody nose
* acne and mild skin disorders
* skin discoloration (chloasma, face and abdomen)
* mild to severe backache and strain
* increased headaches
* difficulty sleeping, and discomfort while sleeping
* increased urination and incontinence
* bleeding gums
* pica
* breast pain and discharge
* swelling of joints, leg cramps, joint pain
* difficulty sitting, standing in later pregnancy
* inability to take regular medications
* shortness of breath
* higher blood pressure
* hair loss
* tendency to anemia
* curtailment of ability to participate in some sports and activities
* infection including from serious and potentially fatal disease
(pregnant women are immune suppressed compared with non-pregnant women, and
are more susceptible to fungal and certain other diseases)
* extreme pain on delivery
* hormonal mood changes, including normal post-partum depression
* continued post-partum exhaustion and recovery period
* stretch marks (worse in younger women)
* loose skin
* permanent weight gain or redistribution
* abdominal and vaginal muscle weakness
* pelvic floor disorder (occurring in as many as 35% of middle-aged
former child-bearers and 50% of elderly former child-bearers, associated
with urinary and rectal incontinence, discomfort and reduced quality of
life)
* changes to breasts
* varicose veins
* scarring from episiotomy or c-section
* other permanent aesthetic changes to the body (all of these are
downplayed by women, because the culture values youth and beauty)
* increased proclivity for hemmorhoids
* loss of dental and bone calcium (cavities and osteoporosis)
* hyperemesis gravidarum
* temporary and permanent injury to back
* severe scarring requiring later surgery (especially after additional
pregnancies)
* dropped (prolapsed) uterus (especially after additional pregnancies,
and other pelvic floor weaknesses -- 11% of women, including cystocele,
rectocele, and enterocele)
* pre-eclampsia (edema and hypertension, the most common complication of
pregnancy, associated with eclampsia, and affecting 7 - 10% of pregnancies)
* eclampsia (convulsions, coma during pregnancy or labor, high risk of
death)
* gestational diabetes
* placenta previa
* anemia (which can be life-threatening)
* thrombocytopenic purpura
* severe cramping
* embolism (blood clots)
* medical disability requiring full bed rest (frequently ordered during
part of many pregnancies varying from days to months for health of either
mother or baby)
* diastasis recti, also torn abdominal muscles
* mitral valve stenosis (most common cardiac complication)
* serious infection and disease (e.g. increased risk of tuberculosis)
* hormonal imbalance
* ectopic pregnancy (risk of death)
* broken bones (ribcage, "tail bone")
* hemorrhage and numerous other complications of delivery
* refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease
* aggravation of pre-pregnancy diseases and conditions (e.g. epilepsy is
present in .5% of pregnant women, and the pregnancy alters drug metabolism
and treatment prospects all the while it increases the number and frequency
of seizures)
* severe post-partum depression and psychosis
* research now indicates a possible link between ovarian cancer and
female fertility treatments, including "egg harvesting" from infertile women
and donors
* research also now indicates correlations between lower breast cancer
survival rates and proximity in time to onset of cancer of last pregnancy
* research also indicates a correlation between having six or more
pregnancies and a risk of coronary and cardiovascular disease

- Legal abortion is safer than childbirth. The death rate from childbirth in first-world countries where abortion is illegal is about ten times as high as the death rate from abortion, and the rate of complications is about 30 times higher. Abortion is, in fact, safer than a penicillin injection and about 11 times as safe as carrying a pregnancy to term.
[link]
The list of possible complications from that is tiny compared to the list of complications from pregnancy.
[link]
[link]
[link]
[link]
[link]
[link]

- Over 70% of Anti-choicers are men, 100% of them will never be pregnant

- States that ban abortion have the lowest funds for adoption & foster care. And with so many kids in adoption, who WILL adopt them? Once these kids are born, they're essentially abandoned to adoption. I can't name one person I
know (& I live in a Conservative area) who's anti-abortion that adopted a kid. Also, with the nation's poor increasing, who's gonna afford extra kids
adopted? The rich or well-to-do aren't adopting much either.
[link]
Over 500,000 children in the U.S. currently reside in some form of foster
care, without being adopted
[link]
Worldwide adoption agencies are practically swamped with a huge majority of children who go unadopted (which, in truly impoverished nations, can possibly lead to horrific results such as the illegal sale of orphans into
human trafficking). As recently as 2006, adoption statistics have actually dropped about 10% to 15% in the top countries.
[link]

- Welfare programs have been significantly reduced over the past few years.
I have done a bit of research beforehand; I'm not just pulling figures and assumptions out of my head. Paraphrasing from answers.com (and my history textbook), regulated welfare programs were formulated during Franklin D.
Roosevelt's presidency. Between the Great Depression and WWII, medicare, medicaid, public housing, food stamps, etc. etc. arose to support victims of
the depression. However, as the U.S. started moving beyond its depression years, unemployment dropped; however, a lingering percentage still had no
intention of finding a job. Welfare programs were thus criticized for
creating a system of dependency. During the 1990s and beyond, states started experimenting with welfare and implementing systems that require people to
work. In 1996, President Clinton signed a bill (heavily supported by
Republicans) that eradicated some welfare programs and only supplied states
with a block grant. Under this law, government funds can only support a
family for five years (maximum). So, welfare programs fail to provide
adequate support for working mothers because of these growing limitations. Raising a child is expensive

- The costs of raising a baby to age 18 costs between $125,000-$250,000 and that's not including college tuition! In your baby's first year alone, you can easily spend between $9,000-$11,000 (for diapers, formula, baby furniture, clothing, baby gear, etc.) If you go back to work right away, childcare can cost as much as $3,000-$4,500 in your baby's first year. If you can stay home with your baby, you can save money....
Crib with mattress- $160-$750
Crib bedding set- $35-$270
Crib blankets (4-6)- $8-$40 each
Fitted crib sheets (2)- $8-$20 each
Water-proof mattress cover- $10-$20
Bassinet or cradle- $35-$260
Changing table- $70-$600
Changing pad & cover- $25-$50
Dresser- $90-$650
Rocker or glider- $90-$500
Car seat- $35-$280
Stroller or travel system- $30-$300
Playpen or porta-crib- $60-$180
Swing- $45-$130
Play center or walker- $50-$125
Mobile- $25-$70
Baby carrier or sling- $20-$140
Monitor- $20-$230
Baby gate- $35-$250
Bouncer seat- $30-$90
Toy box- $25-$90
Gym or play mat- $25-$90
Doorway jumper- $25-$60
High chair- $45-$240
Diaper bag- $10-$60
Diaper pail- $20-$45 Refills- $15-$20 (3 pack)
Thermometer- $10-$90
First aid supplies (kit)- $20-$30
Humidifier or vaporizer- $15-$130
Bottles 8 oz & 4 oz (8-10)- $10-$20 (3 pack) or $20-$40 (starter set)
Bottle warmer- $18-$35
Sterilizer- $30-$70
Breast pump & accessories- $45-$350
Breastfeeding pillow- $20-$35
Bath tub or seat- $15-$35
Hooded towels (4)- $6-$30 each
Wipes (a lot)- $4-$5 (pack)
Clothes for first year- $500-$1,200
Smaller items: Washcloths, diaper rash ointment/powder, nail clippers, nasal
aspirator, baby wash/lotion/oil/shampoo, pacifiers, extra nipples for
bottles, bottle brush, breastfeeding pads, burp cloths/ lap pads, bibs,
receiving blankets, car seat head support (for newborns), toys & more toys.
[link]
Therefore, unless someone can persuade the working middle class of the U.S.
to pay more taxes for unwanted babies and welfare programs that seemingly generates "dependency" on federal funds, denying abortions to woman and
having them deal with these lifelong costs without support is unreasonable.
It is very difficult to get an adequately paying job without a high school
diploma, a few degrees, and college graduation. For the percentage of
pregnant women who are teen mothers-to-be, the job market for them is very isolated.

The way I see it, if you're going to force every woman to give birth to their babies, then you better damn be ready to fund all the adoption centers and foster care programs that will be needed. It will take an increase in taxes to cover the care of the children in the adoption agencies and foster homes. The sorts of things that a lot of people say is not applicable to them, and should not be something they have to pay for. The typical argument is "Hey, why should I have to pay for someone else's kid?"
My answer is "Hey. Because you wanted to force them to have it instead of letting them get an abortion."

And if you are still focused only on the future of the fetus, it will not be the only one suffering, should it be permitted to live-- countless others will be unecessarily affected as a result, both directly and indirectly. An average baby will use over 6,000 diapers in two years. These things do not bio-degrade for millions of years, and they take up unbelieveable amounts of space in landfills, requiring more land be cleared for dumping. I'll only touch upon the amount of soil erosion, water pollution, and habitat loss that entails. Then there is actually feeding the child-- the amount of food a mother must consume to generate enough milk for it, or the amount of food that cows or goats must consume, should parents decide to use formula. Nevermind the fact that the animals must be repeatedly forced into pregnancy for them to lactate, only to have their young taken away (usually for veal) so that the milk can be harvested for marketing. Keep in mind, these are only the most closely-tied examples of child-induced suffering.

[link] is a great article of the
behaviour shown by many members of those who profess to be opposed to
abortion.

More links
[link]
[link]
[link]
[link]
[link]
[link]
[link]
[link]

Here are some interesting facts and PoV (based on both research and opinion):

Is a fetus a human being? Can it be considered a legal person with rights?

A fetus has rarely been considered a human being. They are different from human beings in several key ways:
1) The fetus depends on the mother to survive.
2) Human beings, by definition, are unique and separate individuals.
3) Rights cannot be transferred from person to person. The fetus, although living inside the mother, does not gain the priviledge to gain such status and rights.
4) Fetuses would have to be tax and property payers to become "a legal person with rights."
5) American citizenship is described as anyone "born or naturalized in the U.S."
6) The global declaration of human rights states, "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights." Does this include fetuses, clumps of cells not technically born yet?

Does a fetus have a right to life?

- Most anti-abortion viewers argue "yes." However, they do commonly show sympathy for rape victims or mothers who have high-risk pregnancies. In these situations, anti-choicers are showing that the mother's health and well-being are more valuable than the life of a fetus.

- If a fetus did have the right to life, what's to stop the state from forcing people to donate organs, blood, etc. to save another individual? If a fetus is considered a human being, is the mother obligated to save it and give it an opportunity to live? How is this different from saving an actual human being suffering from a life-threatening disease with few matching donors?

I'm going to reiterate my stance on the issue: It doesn't really matter whether human fetuses are people. What matters is whether women are people, because people are not obligated to use their bodies as life-support for other people. If you truly believe that women are people, neither more nor less completely than any other sort of people, then you must be in favor of reproductive rights. To oppose abortion rights is to say, in effect, that a fetus has a greater claim on a woman's body than she herself does. And that makes her something less than a person.

Though, obviously, I must confess that my views on abortion are colored by the fact that I have a working womb, and no desire (at present or in the foreseeable future) to loan it out to anyone or anything.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

roseliza2 In reply to karenjade [2011-01-11 02:15:45 +0000 UTC]

Actually human beings should learn to control them self. u are making it to be as anyone can just do what they want and delete life.. u know what will happen if that happens? just pray about these things cuz its Easy to go the easy way. Its still KILLING so lets not forget that. Thou shall not kill 6th commandment

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

karenjade In reply to roseliza2 [2011-01-12 00:26:02 +0000 UTC]

Clearly you haven't read any of the previous post. Actually, yes, we *can* do what we want with *our own bodys*, be it consent to sex with a partner or removing an unwanted zygote/embryo/fetus from our bodies. Our bodies are not public property. And you shouldn't use the religion argument because not everyone is of the same religion or even religious at all.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

razz93 In reply to Fighter-Pilot-Fox [2009-05-10 03:19:53 +0000 UTC]

That's so disappointing. I find it so hard to believe that someone has such little value for life. Abortion can have harmful effects just like pregnancy: uterine tearing (which can cause your uterus to rip open should you ever become pregnant on purpose), punctured intestines (which can kill you), ectopic pregnancy (which can kill you), infection (which can kill you), depression (as a result of hormonal changes even if you don't feel guilty), sexual dysfunction, and so on. All because a person didn't have the smarts not to take such a risk or the guts to own up to the consequences of their actions.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Fighter-Pilot-Fox In reply to razz93 [2009-05-11 22:09:16 +0000 UTC]

And your point is?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

razz93 In reply to Fighter-Pilot-Fox [2009-05-13 03:40:09 +0000 UTC]

Nevermind. I don't know why I waste my time with people who display this degree of ignorance.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Fighter-Pilot-Fox In reply to razz93 [2009-05-13 21:21:08 +0000 UTC]

You're one to talk - you use facts about abortion from 10 years ago. Other than the depression factor, the rest of those only apply to people with health problems or with bodies that are to weak to handle a surgical operation. Not to mention there are other ways of getting an abortion besides being operated on, all at different intervals of pregnancy. You should find out all the current facts for something rather than rely on old information to support your point.
I do, however, appreciate the fact that you at least tried to use something other than "U r goin 2 hell, God hates u!!!111@"

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

razz93 In reply to Fighter-Pilot-Fox [2009-05-14 03:32:30 +0000 UTC]

I took the health risks off of the Planned Parenthood website, actually, which I expect to be up to date and accurate. The only way to get an abortion without surgery is to take a combination of pills, which can result in almost as many complications as surgical abortion (clotting, excessive blood loss, infection, ectopic pregnancy, extreme nausea/vomiting, allergic reaction, etc, though admittedly it does not have the risks associated with the instruments), but, sometimes a medication abortion doesn't complete (i.e. the baby's body isn't expelled or is only partly expelled) and requires D&E or another surgical procedure. Plus, the woman has to deal with the fact that a usually-intact fetus lands in her maxipad--which PP fails to mention.

Thank you for that concession. I may have mentioned I used to be very pro-choice, and would get rather annoyed when people shoved religion in my face. I'm Catholic, but I'm not anti-abortion because of religious reasons; I'm anti-abortion because it's horrific and hurts everyone involved more than I believe it could possibly help. Educating myself made all the difference.

But anyway. I think it would be wise to end this, no?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Fighter-Pilot-Fox In reply to razz93 [2009-05-15 00:34:34 +0000 UTC]

fair enough

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

lilithdesade In reply to Fighter-Pilot-Fox [2009-02-04 21:57:31 +0000 UTC]

Your comment was so full of insight. It really speaks volumes about how smart and educated you must be. Thanks!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Fighter-Pilot-Fox In reply to lilithdesade [2009-02-04 23:12:45 +0000 UTC]

I appreciate your sarcasm, but you're not very good at it XD

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

lilithdesade In reply to Fighter-Pilot-Fox [2009-02-05 19:09:07 +0000 UTC]

But your approval means everything to me.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

lilithdesade In reply to kelpiehunterkai [2008-12-10 18:40:28 +0000 UTC]

... or at least give it some thought

👍: 0 ⏩: 1