Aldous Huxley’s ‘Brave New World’ Convinced Bush To Ban Embryonic Stem Cell Research
Aldous Huxley’s ‘Brave New World’ Convinced Bush To Ban Embryonic Stem Cell Research
Shortly after taking office, President Bush announced a policy allowing federal funding of research only on existing stem cell lines, despite the urging of several of his advisers and the scientific community for expanded funding. Bush has nevertheless remained stubborn, twice vetoing legislation that would have lifted the restrictions.
In a new piece in Commentary magazine, Jay Lefkowitz — who advised Bush on stem cells — reveals how the President formulated his 2001 policy. While Bush heard from a variety of groups on both sides of the issue, the turning point appeared to come when Lefkowitz read from Aldous Huxley’s fictional novel, Brave New World, and scared Bush:
A few days later, I brought into the Oval Office my copy of Brave New World, Aldous Huxley’s 1932 anti-utopian novel, and as I read passages aloud imagining a future in which humans would be bred in hatcheries, a chill came over the room.
“We’re tinkering with the boundaries of life here,” Bush said when I finished. “We’re on the edge of a cliff. And if we take a step off the cliff, there’s no going back. Perhaps we should only take one step at a time.”
It’s unclear what passage Lefkowitz read, but Brave New World opens with a scene at the Central London Hatchery and Conditioning Centre, where embryos are turned into full human beings — often dozens of pairs of “identical twins” to ensure “social stability.”
Scientists are not proposing such fictional experiments and recognize the need to balance ethics with scientific progress. In fact, the legislation expanding embryonic stem cell research (vetoed by Bush) — actually proposed ethics regulations that were stricter than Bush’s. Additionally, a bill banning human cloning was blocked by conservatives in Congress in June.
Six years since the President’s misguided, outdated restrictions, the scientific community has come together in support of lifting this ban. Even University of Wisconsin Professor James Thomson, whose work isolating embryonic stem cells has been used by the right wing — including Lefkowitz — as vindication for Bush’s policies, has stressed that the administration’s restrictive stem cell policies are “counter to both scientific and public opinion” and are inhibiting potential treatments.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Apparently no one has taken a copy of “1984″ into the oval office.
-G
December 26th, 2007 at 8:27 pmMe thinks Bush should stick to fictional stories of Pet Goats. If he handles that then we’ll move on to 4th grade reading material.
December 26th, 2007 at 8:30 pm“A chill came over the room.”
I can imagine. Someone had the nerve to bring a book into the same room with Bush. No way to know how he’s going to respond to the written word.
December 26th, 2007 at 8:31 pmLet’s make sure in this final year of the Bush regime, no one brings George a copy of Fail Safe.
December 26th, 2007 at 8:35 pmIt’s sad that we have a president who has to be spoon-fed pieces of books like Brave New World, instead of having read it in its entirety before he was 30. It’s sadder still that someone who actually was familiar with the book’s full content and import was so careful to use only the pieces that supported a narrow agenda and ignore the rest. Will this alliance between the stupid people and the evil ones ever end?
December 26th, 2007 at 8:36 pmA book that comes with a box of crayons is more to George’s level.
December 26th, 2007 at 8:37 pmPlease don’t even joke about ice-9 around him!
December 26th, 2007 at 8:43 pmquick someone take away his copy of Mein Kampf and send Bush a copy Naomi Wolf’s “end of America”
December 26th, 2007 at 8:43 pmI’m wondering what novel was partially read to him to inspire the “human-animal hybrids” line. The Island of Doctor Moreau, perhaps?
December 26th, 2007 at 8:44 pmWait…. does this mean Pres Bush hadn’t read the book before Lefkowitz read it to him!? Seriously, does this man read anything at all?
Not to mention that the type of cloning imagined by Huxley didn’t use stem cells; it required recently-fertilized eggs (embryos). So Lefkowitz and Bush were wrong on that account too…
December 26th, 2007 at 8:46 pmOf course, the parts in the book that describe how the lower casts are automatons that mindlessly follow orders from the top cast didn’t merit much thought from the blue-blood man who loathes tough questions from the little people in the White House press corps…
December 26th, 2007 at 8:51 pmI view any newsmedia stories that president bush reads books with a grain of salt…
December 26th, 2007 at 8:56 pmWhat lessons did Chimpler learn when The Pet Goat was read to him?
-G
December 26th, 2007 at 8:57 pmAnd I suppose we can expect Pres Bush to base future decisions on space exploration on Star Trek or Star Wars any day now…
December 26th, 2007 at 8:58 pmI can’t be the only one that feels an illness coming on every time I see that stupid phucks picture.
December 26th, 2007 at 9:04 pmComment by americangoy — December 26, 2007 @ 8:56 pm
Tedious at times but if you haven’t read “Salt”, it is worth checking out
December 26th, 2007 at 9:04 pmTedious at times but if you haven’t read “Saltâ€, it is worth checking out
Comment by dbadass — December 26, 2007 @ 9:04 pm
Kurlansky’s book? Tedious? You’re mad, son, mad. Frickin’ brilliant book.
His book on the Basques is fascinating and so is “Cod”, but “Salt” is brilliant.
December 26th, 2007 at 9:27 pmI think we will realize many of the things covered by science fiction novels, regardless of any ethics scientists may uphold, because the desire to receive acclaim, and hence funding, is to great a need and desire.
As for books to shape your political outlook, Animal Farm is a great start, followed by 1984, Atlas Shrugged and Fountainhead.
December 26th, 2007 at 9:28 pmI guess eternal war is preferable to embryonics when it comes to social stability..oh wait that hasn’t worked since, what, around 2700 BC?
I am not buying this latest Scheherazade from Casa Blanca
December 26th, 2007 at 9:36 pmToo bad Bush hasn’t bothered to read The Constitution of the United States.
Oh, that’s right. To Chimpy, it’s just a goddamned piece of paper.
December 26th, 2007 at 9:37 pmDespite the present First Lady’s background in reading programs, I am surprised the the President has progressed beyond the Dick and Jane reader.
Simple man? Or, simpleton?
Is it not terrifying that this man can set broad policies on the basis of fictional works, but never lets reality—say, the soon to be confirmed death of the 3,900th soldier, sailor, airmen or marine in Iraq—influence policy at all?
December 26th, 2007 at 9:37 pmThis man is so easily influenced, so stupid, so stubborn and such an airhead…and this just sinks it once and for all.
Cheney has been having a field day with this fool. Ever since he headed Bush’s VP-search ‘committee’ and discovered that HE, Dick Cheney, was the BEST POSSIBLE CANDIDATE, it’s been Good Times on a stick.
December 26th, 2007 at 9:41 pmJason has read Atlas Shrugged. Right. And what did you learn about yourself Jay?
December 26th, 2007 at 9:41 pmMy god! The President of the United States of America never read “Brave New world” before and has to have someone else reading it loud for him?????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I wonder how he manage to read “My pet Goat” on 9/11. Perhaps he prepared it months in advance together with the attacks… Or that was his role while dick chenney masterminded it all with the help of CIA and Blackwater.
December 26th, 2007 at 9:43 pmAnd what did you learn about yourself Jay?
Comment by Bobwurst — December 26, 2007 @ 9:41 pm
You’re kidding, right? ;)
December 26th, 2007 at 9:43 pmCreating the Brave New Bush Crime Family police state… way to go, George…
December 26th, 2007 at 9:45 pmToo bad Bush hasn’t bothered to read The Constitution of the United States.
Did he ever read anything??? I beleive he didn’t even have a passport before being
president.
December 26th, 2007 at 9:47 pmComment by gummitch — December 26, 2007 @ 9:27 pm
Have you read the oyster one?
December 26th, 2007 at 9:47 pm…what strikes me is that his view on embyronics has nothing to do with pro-life but that he fears social stability.
We cannot have social stability because we must have crisis management?
December 26th, 2007 at 9:47 pmToo bad Bush hasn’t bothered to read The Constitution of the United States.
I don’t think he knows of the existance of it!!!!
December 26th, 2007 at 9:49 pmAnd if we take a step off the cliff, there’s no going back. Perhaps we should only take one step at a time.â€
WHAT? Take one step at a time off a cliff? I call moron on this one.
December 26th, 2007 at 9:54 pmI wonder who will read his indictment to him.
And when.
That should spread a chill over the room and joy over the land.
December 26th, 2007 at 9:55 pmActually, I am quite surprised at this story.
I thought GDumbya learned everything he knows from the first “Matrix” movie.
December 26th, 2007 at 10:03 pmHave you read the oyster one?
Comment by dbadass — December 26, 2007 @ 9:47 pm
I’m not sure I even finished it. It just didn’t have the same snap. Of course, with cod he could tie in an enormous amount of European history and with salt, well, with salt it was some of the most important (and ignored) human history of all. After that, oysters?
December 26th, 2007 at 10:12 pmThey blocked science for Jesus votes.
December 26th, 2007 at 10:13 pmRepublicans don’t read.
Schiavo. Don’t ever forget Schiavo.
December 26th, 2007 at 10:14 pmTom Delay:
“It’s never been proven that air toxics [sic] are hazardous to people.”
These are the monsters who hate science.
December 26th, 2007 at 10:17 pmTom Delay:
“It’s never been proven that air toxics [sic] are hazardous to people.â€
These are the monsters who hate science.
Comment by Guido OBGYN Lover — December 26, 2007 @ 10:17 pm
Did he really say that? Hysterical. Air toxics must be hazardous to everything else. What a moron.
I don’t think they hate science so much as they’re askeert of it. Too many intangibles, too many possibilities. It’s much safer just to have Answers.
December 26th, 2007 at 10:28 pmIsn’t that sweet; George is still being read to after all these years. His parents should be so proud. Pretty soon he will be formulating complete sentences. What next?
December 26th, 2007 at 10:30 pmJoseph Goebbels would be proud of today’s American Democrat Party, as today’s Democrat Party embraces the ideology of Josef Mengele.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 26, 2007 @ 10:40 pm
What an ever-persistent f_ckwit.
December 26th, 2007 at 10:43 pmyet “1984″ didn’t convince him that intrusion into people’s lives was wrong?
December 26th, 2007 at 10:44 pmI’m only here to represent the mainstream of America among this mind-numbing disregard for human life, and mind-numbing ignorance.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 26, 2007 @ 10:53 pm
You delude yourself. You do not represent mainstream America. However, you do represent mind-numbing disregard for human life, and staggering ignorance.
December 26th, 2007 at 10:55 pmI’m only here to represent the mainstream of America among this mind-numbing disregard for human life, and mind-numbing ignorance.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 26, 2007 @ 10:53 pm
Lighten up dude. It’s not the the aim of science to clone W.
December 26th, 2007 at 10:56 pmBigfoot’s mind is certainly numb as W’s. Take it easy on the Jeezus Juice.
December 26th, 2007 at 11:02 pmI’m only here to represent the mainstream of America among this mind-numbing disregard for human life, and mind-numbing ignorance.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 26, 2007 @ 10:53 pm
You only represent your own fat ass, Bigfoot, despite your illusion that you’re somehow representative of the common man. You’re so far out on the lost fringe you’ll topple off any minute now.
Being a pompous fathead does not make you smart; that’s the part you’re having so much trouble with.
December 26th, 2007 at 11:10 pmAmazing how libs want to open the door to medical experimentation on humans, yet they call conservatives “Nazisâ€.
Joseph Goebbels would be proud of today’s American Democrat Party, as today’s Democrat Party embraces the ideology of Josef Mengele.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 26, 2007 @ 10:40 pm
You must be really stupid that you don’t know the difference between scientific, ethically conducted human trials and torture.
How do you think medication gets on the market? Or any cancer treatment? The testing includes human trials.
With enough stem cell research we may be able to provide even you with a brain that works.
December 26th, 2007 at 11:11 pmWith enough stem cell research we may be able to provide even you with a brain that works.
Comment by eve — December 26, 2007 @ 11:11 pm
Let’s not get carried away. We’re not talking E E Doc Smith here.
December 26th, 2007 at 11:13 pmBeing a pompous fathead does not make you smart; that’s the part you’re having so much trouble with.
Comment by gummitch — December 26, 2007 @ 11:10 pmâ€
And you just keep believing that, gummitch. You just keep believing that.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 26, 2007 @ 11:18 pm
Oh, so being a pompous fathead does make you smart?
December 26th, 2007 at 11:22 pm“Only liberals can condone medical experimentation on humans, yet tell those who are against such abomination that they are the ones who have ‘disregard for human life’.”
So where are these experiments on human beings, on par with the atrocities that the Nazis commited?
December 26th, 2007 at 11:26 pmOf course you realize you only have credence with your fellow libs, right?
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 26, 2007 @ 11:15 pm
Only a conservative would confuse an embryo with an actual living human being, and would condone the denial of basic human rights, education, medical care, and dignity to said humans.
I don’t need “credence” with fools like you.
December 26th, 2007 at 11:27 pmIf it’s an frozen embryo, George will “protect” it.
December 26th, 2007 at 11:29 pmIf it’s a poor child already born, YOYO. We have wars to fund.
And could someone please get Bush a copy of “Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy”?
We must deal with the threat of the Vogon Constructor Fleet NOW, before it’s too late.
December 26th, 2007 at 11:31 pmI don’t remember that book having pictures. Oh…wait, it was read TO him.
December 26th, 2007 at 11:32 pm“Oh, so being a pompous fathead does make you smart?
Comment by gummitch — December 26, 2007 @ 11:22 pmâ€
You just keep believing that, gummitch.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 26, 2007 @ 11:28 pm
Oh I don’t believe it at all. I think you’re a pompous fathead AND stupid.
December 26th, 2007 at 11:33 pmHas the Chimperror ever demonstrated an ability to understand anything more complex than squeezing the throttle of a chain saw? Every word I’ve read about him seems to indicate a profound ignorance of, and contempt for, science.
December 26th, 2007 at 11:40 pmThankfully, conservatives have continued to put a stop to even the beginnings of such things.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 26, 2007 @ 11:32 pm
Wrong again, BigMoron.
December 26th, 2007 at 11:42 pmThanks for the Salt book reference – looks interesting (yes I am a big geek).
And:
“My god! The President of the United States of America never read “Brave New world†before and has to have someone else reading it loud for him?????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I wonder how he manage to read “My pet Goat†on 9/11. Perhaps he prepared it months in advance together with the attacks…”
Hmmmmm… you know you MIGHT have something there…
December 26th, 2007 at 11:42 pmYou have every right to believe what you will, no matter how wrong.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 26, 2007 @ 11:36 pm
Gosh, thanks.
When you stop demonstrating that you’re a stupid pompous fathead, I’ll also feel free to change my opinion.
December 26th, 2007 at 11:43 pmHey, Footie!!
Jes wanted ta say how impressed I was with yer candor here. We had kinda already figgered it out, but ta hear if come from yer own mouf, so to speak…
“I support Mitt Romney for President. One of my hobbies is auto-fellatio. I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Anything else to say?
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 24, 2007 @ 6:52 pm
Nice Jingle Ballsâ„¢. Very festive ‘n holiday-like, ya know!
December 26th, 2007 at 11:43 pmLighten up, Bigfoot. It’s not like we are cheering when Iraqi children die.
December 26th, 2007 at 11:45 pmHuman embryo = human life.
There is no dignity in a welfare state.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 26, 2007 @ 11:35 pm
A human embryo survives at the will of the host. Period.
There is no dignity in your little dog-eat-dog world. You’ll see.
December 26th, 2007 at 11:46 pmLighten up, Bigfoot. It’s not like we are cheering when Iraqi children die.
Comment by Juan C. — December 26, 2007 @ 11:45 pm
No, only BigBloodthirstyMoron and his kind cheer then…
December 26th, 2007 at 11:48 pmNo, Juan. We can leave that to Fox News and their ever-so-exciting Shock And Aweâ„¢ presentation. And of course, the bedrock crazy 24% who STILL support Herr Brusch.
December 26th, 2007 at 11:48 pmThere is no dignity in your little dog-eat-dog world. You’ll see.
Comment by Zooey
Zoo, you are being too harsh on him. People who follow Straussian doctrines have never been very well educated.
December 26th, 2007 at 11:49 pmThere is no dignity in a welfare state.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 26, 2007 @ 11:35 pm
The GOP running the USA into the ground is not exactly a display of dignity, nor intelligence.
December 26th, 2007 at 11:51 pmOops! He did, reportedly, manage to survive being a pilot.
Why do the Reich-wingers seldom seem to complain about the industrial “human experimentation” at “fertility clinics”?
December 26th, 2007 at 11:52 pmZoo, you are being too harsh on him. People who follow Straussian doctrines have never been very well educated.
Comment by Juan C. — December 26, 2007 @ 11:49 pm
Silly me, I keep trying.
December 26th, 2007 at 11:54 pmGOOPers wage war on reason, war on science, war on working people…all they want to do is drink the Jeezus juice and breed and live on their ddividends with no taxes. Drink up foot in mouth.
December 26th, 2007 at 11:56 pmGOP corruption and greed is what Big Fat Foot in Mouth finds dignified.
December 26th, 2007 at 11:58 pmA million dead Iraqis is sooooo dignified.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:00 amI already told you that you have every right to your opinion, no matter how wrong your opinion is. Why change anything?
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 26, 2007 @ 11:57 pm
Try “I’m rubber and you’re glue,” I heard that works really well.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:00 amHow can one advocate the preservation of embryos, as “human life”, yet fail to be against war, if not a pacifist? It’s never made the slightest sense to me.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:03 ampete, are you referring to the most admired man in America?
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 12:03 am
10% — Utter bullshit.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:06 amStrong economy, winning the war on terror, lower taxes, low unemployment, record home ownership. The U.S. should always be run into the ground like this.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 26, 2007 @ 11:59 pm
Dollar dropping like a lead balloon, Housing bubble rippling through the world economy, higher taxes for working people, few fat cats getting richer doing squat, no oversight of imports, lead poisoning our children, not enough new jobs to keep pace with population growth…not to mention an overstretched nearly broken military, wounded veterans being neglected, over a million dollars a minute to finance the deficit the GOP has run up, neglected roads, bridges railways, denying American Citizens their right to vote…etc., etc.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:08 amWe all know that Yale AND HARVARD graduates are stupid. (sarc).
Comment by good_golly
I guess in Yale they teach you the definition of the word: SOVEREIGNITY., maybe Bush wasn’t that day in the classroom.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:11 am“record home ownership…”
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 26, 2007 @ 11:59 pm
About to be followed by record loss of homes…
December 27th, 2007 at 12:11 am“A rising tide lifts all boats.â€
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 27, 2007 @ 12:08 am
Debunked by actual events. Please pay attention.
This is getting boring. Bye.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:13 amLibs discourage science by shouting down any dissent from their pre-concieved ideas.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 27, 2007 @ 12:08 am
Oh yeah… “The Earth is only 6,000 years old” is a valid scientific theory…
December 27th, 2007 at 12:13 amI EARN my living by my labor.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:13 amConservatives want everyone to excel, live off their dividends if possible, and keep more of what they earn with lower taxes.
In other words, rather than keeping everyone down, as liberals would prefer, conservatives want everyone to have the ability and environment from with to rise to greatness.
“A rising tide lifts all boats.â€
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 27, 2007 @ 12:08 am
If only conservatives weren’t utterly incompetent at executing this dream of theirs given the opportunity, what a wonderful world it would be.
Your “libs this” and “libs that” must be a hot seller on redstate, but it’s pretty funny you try to peddle such obvious fabrications here. We all know you’re delusional, so it’s truly strange that you feel the need to prattle on anyway. It can only be to stoke your own imagination and to demonstrate, again, one a pompous fathead you are.
The so-called rising tide lifts the yachts; people like you delude yourselves into thinking that the yacht owners won’t step on you to board.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:14 amWhen chimpy went to READ the constitution he must have said: “What, no pictures?….it’s just a goddamn piece of paper!”.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:15 amWhen a member of the National Right to Life delegation took out a public-opinion poll to bolster his claim that opposition to stem-cell research would be a winning issue politically, Bush swatted the paper away and replied with uncommon sharpness: “This is too important an issue to take polls about. I am going to decide this based on what I believe is right.†— NOW THAT, SIR IS LEADERSHIP.
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 12:13 am
That, sir, is arrogant narrow-minded stupidity. Just what one would expect from no-nothings.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:15 amMaybe Bigfoot just let it all out from his chest and now will become a nice person.
LIke the George C. Scott’s character.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:16 amI EARN my living by my labor, yet I am taxed at a higher rate than some fat a$$ who sits by the pool collecting interest. F you pig GOP pigs.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:16 amMost Conservatives already have one.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 27, 2007 @ 12:13 am
And he’s going down in the books as the worst president in the history of the country.
Of course, if you’re talking religion, you forgot to capitalize the “O”, as in “have One”. But you’re really not a religious person, or you’d have a conscience about smearing people and telling the lies you do.
Nice Jingle Ballsâ„¢… isn’t it Hobby Time, Li’l Feller?
December 27th, 2007 at 12:16 amLiberals are always looking for a savior.
Most Conservatives already have one.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 27, 2007 @ 12:13 am
Which would explain why totalitarians and fascists require a strong leader. Does this dribble make sense in your head? Because out here, it’s so ridiculous that it passes the border of parody.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:17 amThe issue is more complex than just funding promising science.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 12:19 am
Yeah, just have somebody read you a bit of BRAVE NEW WORLD.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:21 am“Only liberals can condone medical experimentation on humans, yet tell those who are against such abomination that they are the ones who have ‘disregard for human life’.â€
So where are these experiments on human beings, on par with the atrocities that the Nazis commited?
Comment by RickS — December 26, 2007 @ 11:26 pmâ€
Thankfully, conservatives have continued to put a stop to even the beginnings of such things.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 26, 2007 @ 11:32 pm
December 27th, 2007 at 12:24 amTorturing supposed “enemy combatants” is ‘putting a stop’ to those types of things ?
The issue is more complex than just funding promising science.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 12:19 am
Not quite sure attaching stem cell research to D&E abortions is valid.
One is an unpleasant but sometimes necessary medical procedure, and the other is research. Not… the… same…, at all.
One could also say you’re trying to transfer the distaste people have for abortion to stem cell research too.
Nice try, though.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:25 amFootie never answered that one, because he had no answer, MC.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:26 amThankfully, conservatives have continued to put a stop to even the beginnings of such things.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 26, 2007 @ 11:32 pm
Right so people with spinal chord injuries have to go to other countries, like China for treatment. Tell us again how we have the best medicatl treatment in the world, dumbass. http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/linkframe.php?linkid=48177
December 27th, 2007 at 12:27 amJeebutz Kreist! This fool has 0 for his science knowledge.
and…
We’re on the edge of a cliff. And if we take a step off the cliff, there’s no going back. Perhaps we should only take one step at a time.â€
Yeah, on the edge of a cliff, you should take one step over the edge at a time, moron.
He can’t even get a goddamed metaphor straight, let alone make an informed decision about critical policy. phuck, another 13 months of this idiot.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:28 amThere is no dignity in your little dog-eat-dog world. You’ll see.
Comment by Zooey — December 26, 2007 @ 11:46 pm
Oh does Bigfoot sell dog meat out of his door to door meat truck? Sanctity of life my ass!
December 27th, 2007 at 12:30 amLiberals are always looking for a savior.
Most Conservatives already have one.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 27, 2007 @ 12:13 am
Kidding yourself into believing a military deserting moron who is a former cheerleader along with a 5 deferrment coward who believes shooting and killing flightless birds is “sport” are capable of “protecting you” from fictionalized Muslim boogey-men is beyond ludicrous and is patently ridiculous ; much less anything and everything else they’ve both screwed up during the last 7 years.
It’s like feeding false information into a computer ; you’ll emerge with the result you crave , but it isn’t the correct one………
December 27th, 2007 at 12:32 amJames Thomson, the foremost stem-cell researcher in the United States, put it plainly: “If human embryonic stem-cell research does not make you at least a little bit uncomfortable, you have not thought about it enough.â€
Comment by good_golly
Kind of like opposing federal funds to provide medical coverage for children.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:32 amHow can “progressives†claim to value human life but then be in favor of “partial birth abortion†and experimenting on embryos. It’s a very short step from there to actually completing the birth process by a few moments more and then experimenting on “the fetus†(baby).
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 12:07 am
How can neocons claim to be prolife while they are cheering the death of one million Iraqis?
December 27th, 2007 at 12:33 amWhat is the Numbskull in Chief doing to that kid in the picture?
December 27th, 2007 at 12:36 amFootie never answered that one, because he had no answer, MC.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — December 27, 2007 @ 12:26 am
Because there simply isn’t one.
I don’t recall the state or the venue , but one of the most repulsive , disgusting and despicable things I ever witnessed in my life , was the one GOP presidential candidates debate , where each and every GOP imbecile on the stage was trying ‘out-do’ the other in condoning and even increasing the use of torture ; and the morons in the audience were going wild in agreement……..
December 27th, 2007 at 12:36 amBrave New World.. Unbelievable. And I read that book in high school. Bush is like the people in Huxley’s book that took soma. Bush has been on soma since he took office. And I agree. Someone should have frisbeed a copy of “1984″ book and also the DVD movie of “V for Vendetta.” I don’t Bush can spell utopia or comprehend the word “totalitarian.” Look how Bush was a village idiot in his interview on NBC News with Brian Williams when Williams asked him about the book that Bush claimed to had read: Albert Camus’s “The Stranger.”
December 27th, 2007 at 12:37 amThey hesitate to concede the moral implications of partial birth abortion because that admission might lead to wider bans on earlier term abortions that are less morally challenging.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 12:36 am
But you do, by putting the two together the way you do.
Prima facie – it’s right in front of your face, the two different subject matters linked in one sentence. Sorry, but it’s impossible to escape the implication.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:38 amNow it’s official George W. Bush can’t read. He has to have someone read to him. No wonder he never finished the book My Pet Goat. Please Connie finish reading the book to George so you can start reading him another children’s book.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:40 amI personnally lament the death of any Iraqis.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 12:39 am
But you support Bush which means you support the illegal invasion of a sovereign nation with what intent exactly?
December 27th, 2007 at 12:41 am“Not quite sure attaching stem cell research to D&E abortions is valid.â€
Republic:
I’m not equating the two. I’m saying that when conservatives want to show restraint, it’s due to a concern of ’slippery slope’. Allowing some use of embryos whose use is in turn used as justification of wider or more extensive use of other embryos. Just like the argument of pro-choice defenders of partial birth abortion. They hesitate to concede the moral implications of partial birth abortion because that admission might lead to wider bans on earlier term abortions that are less morally challenging.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 12:36 am
Why the hell do Cancervatives always talk about some “slippery slope” when it comes to an issue that they stupidly believe they’re righteous about , and ignore everything the idiot occupying the Oval Office has done in increasing his own individual power as president ; and most of the times , it appears he’s doing it illegally…..?
December 27th, 2007 at 12:41 amHow about that photo of George trying his “dangest” to look sympathetic to the child he is doing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to help? How typical. Ever notice that EVERYONE he screws he tries to get some staged photo taken of the victim? He must keep some “bragging book” somewhere of all the people he helped kill with his Republican brand of compassionate conservatism.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:41 amWhat’s so bad about human/animal hybrids? Personally, I’d love a prehensile tail and the night vision of a cat. Failing that, I’d settle for a more effective treatment for my arthritis. I’m currently putting off having a couple vertebrae “fused” until I can’t control the pain with anti-inflammatory medication.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:43 amI personnally lament the death of any Iraqis.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 12:39 am
But you support Bush which means you support the illegal invasion of a sovereign nation with what intent exactly?
Comment by Shayne — December 27, 2007 @ 12:41 am
Bargain oil prices…………
December 27th, 2007 at 12:46 amI concede your point. To me, they are life issues. But, it is obviously unreasonable to equate the two. I was trying to show that slippery slope is a reasonable concern for these kinds of issues and I was trying to relate it to a progressive issue that might make sense. After looking at it, I understand the percieved implication, although it was unintended.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 12:47 am
All abuse of power/knowledge/force can be perverted , when it is put into the wrong hands.
I simply do not understand those who are so supposedly concerned about a “slippery slope” not being able to notice and admit that the current retard in the Oval Office , along with his entire garbage administration , are a “slippery slope” of mythic proportions……
December 27th, 2007 at 12:53 amBut you support Bush which means you support the illegal invasion of a sovereign nation with what intent exactly?
Comment by Shayne — December 27, 2007 @ 12:41 am
I lament every innocent Japanese killed during WWII, but I don’t regret that we went to war with Japan in the belief that was what was required to defend our country from further attack.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 12:52 am
We didn’t invade Panama after Pearl Harbor ; when did Iraq attack us ?
December 27th, 2007 at 12:55 amBut you support Bush which means you support the illegal invasion of a sovereign nation with what intent exactly?
Comment by Shayne — December 27, 2007 @ 12:41 am
I lament every innocent Japanese killed during WWII, but I don’t regret that we went to war with Japan in the belief that was what was required to defend our country from further attack.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 12:52 am
The Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. What did the Iraqis do?
December 27th, 2007 at 12:55 amYou anti abortion people are just that. Being pro life has nothing to do with it. Now you make Jamie Lynn Spears a good girl because she is choosing to keep her baby instead of having an abortion. And while I’m definitely not advocating her having an abortion I don’t think we should be patting her on the back for being a great kid because she got pregnant at age 16. You people advocate abstinence only programs for sex ed which have caused a surge in teen pregnancies and you are against abortion under any circumstances. So Jamie Lynn is a hero for having her baby and well she can afford the expenses so that’s fine with you people. But oh the wailing you’ll do when all these teen pregnancies cause the mothers and children to be on welfare or at least S chip health care. For the record, we don’t want to hear it.
December 27th, 2007 at 1:01 amBut you support Bush which means you support the illegal invasion of a sovereign nation with what intent exactly?
Comment by Shayne — December 27, 2007 @ 12:41 am
I lament every innocent Japanese killed during WWII, but I don’t regret that we went to war with Japan in the belief that was what was required to defend our country from further attack.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 12:52 am
December 27th, 2007 at 1:07 amAre you drunk ?
Insane ?
You claim to lament over those that were on the side of the aggressors in a war of aggression that involved almost the entire planet ; yet you support an illegal and immoral invasion and occupation because you believe it is “required” to prevent further attacks against us ?
If you owned a cattle farm/ranch in the Old West , would you teach all predators a lesson by killing an owl ?
I can’t believe how ignorant and stupid you Cancervative fools are……..
If you want I’ll pull the quote, but Lincoln said right before the 1864 that in all probability, he would not be re-elected. Most people (today) think of Lincoln as our greatest president. At the end of his first term, he must have been unpopular enough to question his re-election.
George Bush may be the horrible president that you think he is. But, please keep in mind that popularity doesn’t necessarily equate to job performance.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 1:03 am
December 27th, 2007 at 1:11 amBelieve me , I never have nor ever will.
Another example for everyone : the presidency of Ronnie Retard.
He’s still popular in some circles , but based upon his performance , he was pretty terrible.
BTW
Please stop with silly comparisons of our former great presidents to Chimpy ; that is not only galactically stupid , but also totally vile and unconscionable……
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 1:07 am
And the reason I don’t support Hillary is because she was dumb enough to fall for the lies on the lead up to Iraq that Bushco was feeding her. In my mind that makes her a poor choice to be the Democratic candidate. And you still haven’t figure out that the war was based on lies spoon fed by the administration.
December 27th, 2007 at 1:14 amIs the Iraq war justify just because you have a video showing Hillary defending her vote in the Senate?
Anytime someone questions the reason for going to war, apparently all a war supporter has to say is “Well, Hillary voted for it”, and that for some reason is supposed to end all debate about Iraq.
“I lament every innocent Japanese killed during WWII, but I don’t regret that we went to war with Japan in the belief that was what was required to defend our country from further attack.”
So it’s okay to accept the death of innocent civilians during wartime, but the destruction of embryos to help find cures for numerous medical ailments is appalling?
December 27th, 2007 at 1:23 amAnd I believe that life begins at conception.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 1:18 am
You are free to believe whatever you want. So don’t have an abortion.
December 27th, 2007 at 1:26 amAnd I believe that life begins at conception.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 1:18 am
You are free to believe whatever you want. So don’t have an abortion.
Comment by jb — December 27, 2007 @ 1:26 am
December 27th, 2007 at 1:29 amOr run for any elected office……..
Or vote…….
Maybe conservatives will be in favor of stem cell research if they are told those embryos might, one day, grow up to be America-hating terrorists and/or suicide bombers.
Why, they might even ask those embryos be tortured for good measure.
/sarcasm off
December 27th, 2007 at 1:30 amMaybe conservatives will be in favor of stem cell research if they are told those embryos might, one day, grow up to be America-hating terrorists and/or suicide bombers.
Why, they might even ask those embryos be tortured for good measure.
/sarcasm off
Comment by Gregor Samsa
Or people living in the 9th Ward in NOLA.
December 27th, 2007 at 1:31 amComment by RickS — December 27, 2007 @ 1:31 am
Or, in general, anyone too dark, too poor, not European-looking, and speaking English with a funny accent.
I mean, reichwingers don’t really t care for anyone fitting that description after they’re born. I’d be surprised if they cared for them before they were born.
Unless they can be used for a photo-op during an election year, of course.
December 27th, 2007 at 1:36 amComment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 1:36 am
Sarcasm is used effectively if you have a cursory knowledge of the topic at hand and a high school-level command of the English language -neither of which you seem to have.
An embryo is not a baby.
December 27th, 2007 at 1:42 amIf partial birth abortion is o.k., and experimenting on embryos is o.k., then why not complete the birth process by a moment more and experiment on the baby? Nobody wants it anyway. (sarc)
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 1:36 am
Are you a child? Nobody advocates partial birth abortion. But virtually all partial birth abortions are done in cases where the fetus is so malformed that it will never be able to survive. But I suppose you’re also against surgery done to the fetus to save it’s life otherwise it will die before it comes to term. Because the first surgeries of this type done were EXPERIMENTATION on the fetus to help it survive.
December 27th, 2007 at 1:46 amComment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 1:48 am
A fetus becomes a baby after its birth.
And I don’t “claim” it. It’s always been medically defined that way.
You don’t even know the difference between an embryo and a fetus, do you?
December 27th, 2007 at 1:53 amComment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 1:36 am
i’m glad you feel that way gg. when the cures come conservatives will listen to the voice of their consciences, refuse them and thereby become naturally selected for extinction. the end of conservatism as we know it. isn’t nature beautiful?
December 27th, 2007 at 1:54 amComment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 1:51 am
chuck do you ever read back to yourself the stuff you write?
(just curious)
December 27th, 2007 at 1:56 amSo if Iraq goes south in the next year, we can all blame Hillary?
December 27th, 2007 at 1:59 amJoe, isn’t that like saying that liberals will abort themselves into extinction?
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 1:56 am
no because the concept of liberal or conservative isn’t the genetic code. a conservative will refuse a cure for cancer (for example) derived from stem cell research as a matter or conservative ethic. or he will embrace liberalism and live. the remaining conservatives will be “filtered” out of human society via higher mortality rates. very few people will embrace conservatism if it means a shorter life span. conservatism (as we know it) will become extinct.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:03 amComment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:00 am
And who gave you the right to impose your decision on the parents?
Also, abortion is not done simply for “convenience” as you so simplemindedly put it. You are also seemingly unaware of the need to end a pregnancy to save the life of the woman.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:05 amSo up until the moment of birth, it is o.k. to kill the “fetus†for the convenience of the parents, in your view? or are there limits to the “right to kill�
Why draw the line at the moment of birth, and not the point of viability? or sooner? at the moment of conception perhaps?
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:00
Nobody does this moron. Partial birth abortions are reserved for fetuses that are deformed and will die at birth or shortly thereafter. Where do you people get these pinhead arguments you make.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:06 amBesides if you conservatives are so against abortions of any kind then why do you complain when poor women have babies and then need public assistance. Why don’t you promise to provide for the needs of all children who are born to mothers who can’t afford them.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:08 amAnd who gave you the right to impose your decision on the murdered babies?
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:08 am
Babies being murdered is illegal. Fetuses being aborted is not. Maybe that will help you nitwits understand the difference but I doubt it.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:10 amComment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:08 am
Are you following the argument? Do you have a short attention span problem? It’s not me deciding. It’s the parents. Aborting or not is their decision. As a matter of fact, it’s the woman’s decision.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:10 amfor shame.
are you saying stem cell research is nazi experimentation?
pretzel logic like that will become extinct on it’s own and rightfully so.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:11 amHillary, Hillary, Hillary you trolls are so freakin’ stupid you think we all give a shit what Hillary said about the war. The reason we don’t like her is because she has never admitted that she made a mistake in supporting the war. You people are truly clueless.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:12 amComment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:11 am
conservatives protect embryos but neglect children. it doesn’t make sense but there it is.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:15 amWhere do you people get these pinhead arguments you make.
Comment by Shayne — December 27, 2007 @ 2:06 am
Rush? Sean? Matt? Michael? And other assorted Reich-wing commentators.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:16 amComment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:13 am
Unlike you, writing coherent sentences implies little or no work for me.
So, I write what I mean and I mean what I type. Don’t try to “translate” what I wrote.
As I already said, you are completely unaware of the need to end a pregnancy to save the life of the woman. Or to end a pregnancy product of a rape. Such scenarios don’t fit in your tiny, deluded, self-righteous mind.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:16 amNo Joe, that is not what I am saying. You are really having a hard time keeping up, aren’t you?
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:14 am
gg, if you’re going to rude about it you’ve all ready lost. science is truth, no bigotry, no prejudice just honest inquiry. stamping your feet, holding your breath or putting hands over your ears won’t change the laws of gravity.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:18 am“If things go well in Iraq in the next year, will Hillary remind us that she was for the war before she was against it?”
Most likely, she’s pretty much an opportunist. And I’m not a big fan of hers, so I feel no obligation to defend her or justify her actions.
“Perhaps “mothers who can’t afford them†should consider that before getting pregnant, rather than using abortion as a selfish tool of convenience.”
So punish the child for the actions of their mother?
December 27th, 2007 at 2:18 amgood_golly are you really that ignorant that you believe any woman has an abortion because of “selfish convenience”? You’ve obviously never created a fetus and had feeling about giving birth or you would know that no decisions of this nature are every made easily and for petty selfish convenience. You people are really pathetically ignorant and for the good of the gene pool should consider abstinence only so you don’t taint the intelligence level of human beings.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:18 amDo I need to dumb it down for you a little? I’m serious, I’ll try.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 2:17 am
chuck, i can’t help you unless you want to be helped.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:18 am177. Liberals claim to care about children but kill them by the millions. It doesn’t make sense, but there it is.
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:16 am
It does when you believe that a fetus is not a child……..Your insistence that it is , doesn’t make it correct.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:18 amOnly liberals have abortions? LMAO!
December 27th, 2007 at 2:19 amchuck do you ever read back to yourself the stuff you write?
(just curious)
Comment by joe cantwell — December 27, 2007 @ 1:56 am
Do I need to dumb it down for you a little? I’m serious, I’ll try.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 2:17 am
Even more than your typical post ?
Is that actually possible ?
December 27th, 2007 at 2:19 amComment by Shayne — December 27, 2007 @ 2:18 am
shayne, from an earlier post gg replied in a comment that he is a man. fyi.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:20 amComment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:19 am
I believe Shayne understand those nuances better than you understand the clear differences between an embryo, a fetus, and baby.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:21 amPerhaps “mothers who can’t afford them†should consider that before getting pregnant, rather than using abortion as a selfish tool of convenience.
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:11 am
I suppose you’ve never heard of anybody getting pregnant while using birth control. And just because you are unable to find a sex partner normal people can. You don’t want any abortions than you self centered egomaniacal bastards will have to start providing day care, health care and financial benefits to women unable to provide for children. Because you will never be able to stop people from having sex unless they are as pathetic as you are.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:21 amShayne: Wouldn’t you agree that not everything that is legal is right? Do you understand the difference?
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:19
Do you understand that when something is legal according to the laws of this country it is not up to you to decide it is wrong. And when something is illegal in this country, like water boarding, it is alsop not ok for you idiots to decide is is right.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:23 amBabies being murdered is illegal. Fetuses being aborted is not. Maybe that will help you nitwits understand the difference but I doubt it.
Comment by Shayne — December 27, 2007 @ 2:10 am
____________________________
Shayne: Wouldn’t you agree that not everything that is legal is right? Do you understand the difference?
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:19 am
December 27th, 2007 at 2:23 amI do.
Just because you believe abortion to be ‘wrong’ , doesn’t mean you’re ‘right’……
Perhaps “mothers who can’t afford them†should consider that before getting pregnant, rather than using abortion as a selfish tool of convenience.
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:11 am
And here you have what is really at the heart of this nitwit’s opposition to abortion: The aim is to punish the woman’s “irresponsibility”.
He will also have no qualms about punishing the children after they are born by not supporting (let alone providing) affordable child care, or health care for the mothers.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:25 amOnly liberals have abortions? LMAO!
Comment by pete — December 27, 2007 @ 2:19 am
Didn’t President Bush pay for an abortion for an old girlfriend. Was he a liberal back then?http://www.realchange.org/bushjr.htm
December 27th, 2007 at 2:26 amMC: Your blind denial that an unborn child is not a child, doesn’t make it correct.
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:21 am
Recommend (0) | Report Abuse
in earlier comment you claimed that it was a liberal too. gg, think logically, does anything you’ve written make any sense to you when you really consider it? (from both a prototypically point of view as well as impartial empiricism.) and if so, why?
December 27th, 2007 at 2:27 amIt does when you believe that a fetus is not a child……..Your insistence that it is , doesn’t make it correct.
Comment by MCMetal — December 27, 2007 @ 2:18 am
___________________
MC: Your blind denial that an unborn child is not a child, doesn’t make it correct.
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:21 am
December 27th, 2007 at 2:27 amThe US Supreme Court believes I am and that you are not ; as do the majority of Americans.
Go purchase an island and bring along your religious or morally righteous brethren and start your own country if you don’t like it.
This country has been in decline since the ‘religious right’ gained influence ; anyone claiming otherwise is either delusional and/or full of shit…….
Gregor: I understand what you claim to be the differences between an embryo, a fetus and a baby. I just don’t accept your artificial distinctions, e.g. your contention that a fetus becomes a baby at the moment of birth and not a moment earlier, and can thus be killed at the choice of “the woman†for convenience or otherwise up to the moment of birth.
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:24 am
December 27th, 2007 at 2:28 amScientific studies are “artificial distinctions” to you ?
Nice to know that Jesus posts here………
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:24 am
As I told you before, it’s not my claim and it’s not “artificial”: There are clear developmental differences between all three stages. And the definition is a scientific/medical one, not invented by me.
I already provided you a link with more information. Do you also want me to read it for you?
December 27th, 2007 at 2:28 amMC: Your blind denial that an unborn child is not a child, doesn’t make it correct.
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:21 am
Perhaps you’d like the government to start paying for funerals for women like myself who have miscarriages at 20 weeks because after all that was a baby and not a fetus that was miscarried. But I suppose you believe that all miscarriages are actually abortions because your small mind can’t fathom that nature kills off a certain amount of fetuses.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:29 amWhy did good golly put the word woman, under these signs ” “?
I find very funny that “men” makes an opinion of something they will never get to live, personally.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:30 amComment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:28 am
Which is tantamount to punishing the parents for making “bad decisions. What constitutes a bad decision is conveniently defined by the likes of you, of course.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:30 amNo Gregor. The point is that we do not have the right to “terminate†unborn babies simply because their parents may have made a bad decision.
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:28 am
Only a true loser would believe that having consenting sex between adult is a bad decision. Nobody terminates unborn babies that would be illegal. They terminate pregnancies in the early stages just like nature terminates 1/3 of all pregnancies before the fetus is viable.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:31 am197. No Gregor. The point is that we do not have the right to murder unborn babies simply because their parents may have made a bad decision.
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:27 am
December 27th, 2007 at 2:31 amYou’re wrong ; we do have that right.
And they’re still only “babies” to you , not to everyone……..
BTW, 3900.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:32 amThe other is murder.
Comment by good_golly
So stop jacking off, murderer.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:33 amWhy did good golly put the word woman, under these signs †“?
I find very funny that “men†makes an opinion of something they will never get to live, personally.
Comment by Juan C. — December 27, 2007 @ 2:30 am
December 27th, 2007 at 2:34 amMy “opinion” on the whole matter is that it is the woman’s right to choose………
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:31 am
What a twit.
A miscarriage is an abortion that happened naturally, and/or spontaneously.
good_golly is obviously too young to know.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:34 amAt what point does the fetus become a child?
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 2:34 am
At birth. It’s always been medically defined that way.
You are asking a question that has been answered a million times before. Including in this very thread.
ssheeeshh….
December 27th, 2007 at 2:35 am“It does when you believe that a fetus is not a child……..Your insistence that it is , doesn’t make it correct.â€
Comment by MCMetal — December 27, 2007 @ 2:18 am
Abortion is a very divisive issue. The problem with not thinking of the fetus as a child begs the question: At what point does the fetus become a child?
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 2:34 am
It isn’t for me to decide ; I claimed scientific studies as my base factor in that determination.
What are you and “golly” basing it upon ?
December 27th, 2007 at 2:36 amYour religious upbringing and/or beliefs ?
I’ll stick with science…….And the woman’s right to choose
At what point does the fetus become a child?
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 2:34 am
that’s thoughtful inquiry.
did you notice that, gg?
December 27th, 2007 at 2:37 amYou are playing games with semantics now Gregor. When I am talking about “abortion,†I am talking about the intentional killing of unborn babies, not miscarriages that happen naturally.
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:37 am
December 27th, 2007 at 2:39 amOkay , we get it.
You’re anti-abortion ; the SCOTUS and most Americans do not agree with you.So you’re shit out of luck.
Let us remember that the story here is not about abortion. “Partial birth” or otherwise.
The story is about the President making a policy decision based on an old novel that frightened him. Personally, I can’t imagine a worse motivation. I don’t want my President, doctor, lawyer etc making decisions based on fear and fiction.
And I, sure as heck, don’t want people making decisions about my life; based on their interpretation of a 2,000 year old book. Especially one with many glaring contradictions and lapses in logic. One which has been demonstrated to contain numerous errors in the way it explains technical items.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:40 amOf course, if men give birth, abortion would be legal and clinics would have the bar across the abortion room.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:40 amComment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 2:34 am
chuck, would you vote for “huck” huckabee if he were the gop candidate for president?
if you’re answer is yes could you provide us with a few reasons why?
thanks.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:40 amComment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:37 am
No, I am not. Here is another link for you. Click on it and educate yourself. A miscarriage is an abortion. If anyone here is playing fast and loose with his definitions is you.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:41 amA miscarriage is not an abortion Shayne. One is natural. The other is murder.
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:31 am
That interesting because the medical term is spontaneous abortion. Is there anything you know anything about?
December 27th, 2007 at 2:42 amComment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 2:34 am
chuck, would you vote for “huck†huckabee if he were the gop candidate for president?
if you’re answer is yes could you provide us with a few reasons why?
thanks.
Comment by joe cantwell — December 27, 2007 @ 2:40 am
December 27th, 2007 at 2:43 amBecause “God” is obviously helping along his campaign ; like the moron claimed to that audience the other day , when he prattled on about Jesus feeding a multitude of people with almost nothing……
Comment by Shayne — December 27, 2007 @ 2:42 am
catch of the day, shayne!
(congratulations)
December 27th, 2007 at 2:44 amPlease understand, I don’t believe in God. I don’t think life begins at conception because somebody told me I should believe that. But, if you think of it reasonably; if not the moment of conception – then when?
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 2:43 am
chuck, your atheism has served you well.
(gg, learn from chuck!)
December 27th, 2007 at 2:47 amComment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 2:43 am
At birth, Capt… at birth… you can clamp your fists and stomp your feet on the floor all bloody day long -it won’t change facts one bit: A fetus becomes a baby only after birth.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:47 am“Nobody terminates unborn babies.†Are you serious?
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:33 am
Because the technical term is fetuses. Infanticide which is the murder of a baby is illegal. Nobody aborts near full term pregnancies, it doesn’t happen. If the fetus is viable outside the womb and the mother’s life is at risk they will deliver it. Why would anybody wait until late in their pregnancy to abort a baby for convenient. Do you think being pregnant for 26 weeks when a fetus has a chance for survivability outside the womb would be convenient. And abortions this late are not done.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:48 amGregor. You were conceived. When you were conceived, that moment, you weren’t a life? You didn’t come into existence.
Please understand, I don’t believe in God. I don’t think life begins at conception because somebody told me I should believe that. But, if you think of it reasonably; if not the moment of conception – then when?
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 2:43 am
December 27th, 2007 at 2:49 amWonderful ; but you’re still not a BABY.
You’re more like a friggin’ guppy.
I’ll say it again ; based upon scientific research/study(s) and a belief in a woman’s right to choose………
Comment by Shayne — December 27, 2007 @ 2:48 am
shayne, i don’t gg’s coming back tonight, you nailed him but good.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:50 amComment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 2:50 am
thanks, chuck. i appreciate your candor.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:51 amPlease understand, I don’t believe in God. I don’t think life begins at conception because somebody told me I should believe that. But, if you think of it reasonably; if not the moment of conception – then when?
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 2:43 am
At conception really? What about the large amount of tubal pregnancies that occur. The egg is ferilized and is starting to divide. But it will kill the mother if it is not removed is that killing an infant too?
December 27th, 2007 at 2:51 amchuck, would you vote for “huck†huckabee if he were the gop candidate for president?
I would have to think long and hard before I could vote for huckabee. I would have to weigh my distaste for policy being driven by religion against my distaste for broader government and entitlement spending. Guilanni, I could say yes. McCain, I could say yes. Huckabee, probably not.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 2:50 am
December 27th, 2007 at 2:54 amUmmm , WHY ????????
The last 5 horseshit GOP presidents have all been criminals and/or treasonous , traitorous turds ; what the hell is with you GOP backers ?
Is it some sort of birth defect or something ?
A fetus becomes a baby only after birth.
Comment by Gregor Samsa — December 27, 2007 @ 2:47 am
I think you may be side stepping the question. When does life begin?
Before conception? At conception? Sometime during pregnancy? At birth? Sometime after birth?
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 2:53 am
December 27th, 2007 at 2:55 amSome sort of ‘life’ begins at conception ; but like I stated earlier , it is the life of a friggin guppy……..
“Ectopic pregnancy occurs at a rate of 19.7 cases per 1,000 pregnancies in North America and is a leading cause of maternal mortality in the first trimester.” from American Family Physician.
Why don’t all you weeping anti choice folks start mourning for the death of all these lives that will be ended since you are unable to make any distinctions between embryos, fetuses and infants. Life starts at conception to you and this is conception run amok because humans don’t come in neat little packages that fit your needs. Live with it.
December 27th, 2007 at 3:01 amComment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 2:53 am
No, I am not.
Potential human life might begin at conception, but it is not a human baby yet -which is where you ar etrying to take this argument.
And since you are making me repeat myself, ad nauseam, I will leave you in the hands of more patient posters.
Have a good evening.
December 27th, 2007 at 3:02 amSome sort of ‘life’ begins at conception ; but like I stated earlier , it is the life of a friggin guppy……..
Comment by MCMetal — December 27, 2007 @ 2:55 am
For single celled organisms life begins at conception. I’m not sure a guppy even qualifies.
December 27th, 2007 at 3:03 amIt’s not an infant, but I would argue that it is a life.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 2:59 am
So is every chicken and cow and plant you eat. It is all life. So you do split hair about what is life when it meets your needs just when it involves other people’s needs.
December 27th, 2007 at 3:05 amI suddenly had a revelation that killing babies intentionally for the convenience of the mother is o.k. (sarc)
But (sarc off), I do need to sleep. Good night.
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 3:00 am
If you weren’t so dimwitted to believe that abortion is a convenience maybe you would be worth discussing these issues with. What your minister told you that’s why women had abortions and you believe everything he tells you. You are either a fool or willfully misinterpreting the issue. Either way you sound like a jackass.
December 27th, 2007 at 3:07 amCaptain, that fertilized egg is as important as all the fertilized eggs that fail to embed in a uterus and pass on to oblivion. Not important enough to weep over. Not every fertilized egg becomes a baby. At least 1/3 do not ever make it under natural circumstances. Maybe you should talk to somebody with infertility issues and you will learn all the ways these embryos can be lost and you can then get over these histrionics.
December 27th, 2007 at 3:10 amBut (sarc off), I do need to sleep. Good night.
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 3:00 am
Recommend (0) | Report Abuse
gg, get some rest.
and get over yourself you kookie nut bar!
(what a guy!)
December 27th, 2007 at 3:23 amwhy is bush being ‘advised’ about stem cells by a lawyer (lefkowitz) ? – i would have thought that a medical research scientist would be more qualified to do this
December 27th, 2007 at 3:47 amAll this talk about abortion reminds me of 2 things:
You can’t be a Nielson family if you don’t have a TV… and
You can’t have an opinion about abortion if you don’t have a UTERUS
December 27th, 2007 at 3:50 amFaulty Intelligence. It underlines Bush policy.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:01 amleave it to bert’s simple mind to get it entirely wrong1
LOL!
December 27th, 2007 at 8:35 amWhen I first scanned this article, I thought it said that Bush had read Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World. My immediate thought was that it was a lie. Despite his claim to have read “a few Shakespeares”, I knew that Bush would never read even a single “Huxley”.
I then read more carefully that Lefkowitz read the portion of the novel to Bush.
Nevermind.
December 27th, 2007 at 9:07 amThe man is a moron, there’s no doubt about it.
December 27th, 2007 at 9:09 amBhutto shot thru neck…dead.
December 27th, 2007 at 9:11 amhttp://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/12/27/pakistan.sharif/index.html
Hooray for the power of science fiction. George “Buck Rogers” Bush is going to get Ming the Merciless and his band of Al Queda! Pew pew pew!
December 27th, 2007 at 9:12 amWell, I dont think Big (O) has read Brave New World because they were not killing embryos in the book they were raising them. The social stability came from drugs.
December 27th, 2007 at 9:13 ambert, everything you think or say is wrong. case closed.
December 27th, 2007 at 9:15 amComment by BERT CONVY — December 27, 2007 @ 9:01 am
Many of the private companies doing stem cell research are conservative owned. wthu.
December 27th, 2007 at 9:18 amBOSTON, August 17, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) – After a recent discovery by the press, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney appears to be pulling out his investments from two companies that use embryonic stem cell research. The discovery of his investments may have a negative effect on voters who already have doubts over the statesman’s inconsistent record on life issues.
Members of the press and campaign opposition recently examined a federal financial statement and found that Romney owns stocks in Novo Nordisk and Millipore Corporation, two companies that use embryonic stem cells in their research, the Boston Herald Reports. Since the discovery was made public, Romney has stated that his investments will likely change to support his views
December 27th, 2007 at 9:20 amPersonally I think we should arrest for murder the people at fertility clinics who flush the unneeded embryos down the toilet. And while we are at it, I think we need to arrest women who have miscarriages. After all, they have killed a “human” by having that miscarriage.
December 27th, 2007 at 9:23 amBhutto shot thru neck…dead.
http://www.cnn.com/ 2007/ WORLD/ asiapcf/ 12/ 27/ pakistan.sharif/ index.html
Comment by OleHippieChick
This is so sad. We live in a world where dictators have their rivals assassinated. I fear that we are not far from things like this happening in this country. I especially fear for Obama if he is the Presidential candidate for the Democrats. White supremacists have increased their numbers greatly under Bush and will undoubtedly see it as their duty to assassinate Obama.
December 27th, 2007 at 9:27 amThis is another thread that has been taken over by the trolls. Why do you folks allow this to happen? What good does it do?
December 27th, 2007 at 9:30 amAfter all, they have killed a “human†by having that miscarriage.
Comment by bilbobaggins — December 27, 2007 @ 9:23 am
arrest god as an accomplice
December 27th, 2007 at 9:31 amThose who support abortion will continue to give their excuses and weak-minded arguements as to why it is “OK†to kill kids in the womb, but not out of the womb, -Big (O)
Didnt you read my post above? And how can you be pro-war while TRYING to appear moral?
December 27th, 2007 at 9:41 amO. Bigfoot
People who oppose public healthcare are for the mass murder of people who have already been born.
December 27th, 2007 at 9:50 amO. Bigfoot
People who favour wars in order to impose their political ideals upon other countries are for the mass murder of people who have already been born.
December 27th, 2007 at 9:53 amPeople who oppose teaching teenagers about condoms and thus reducing those teenagers’ chances of catching AIDS, are for the mass murder of people who have already been born.
December 27th, 2007 at 9:54 amO. Bigfoot
People who oppose helping single mothers pay for to feed, cloth and educate their children, are for the mass murder of people who have already been born.
December 27th, 2007 at 9:56 amO. Bigfoot
People who defend torture, have no business speaking about morality.
December 27th, 2007 at 9:57 amComment by O. Bigfoot — December 27, 2007 @ 9:57 am
Gee nevermind the numerous posts, about how the rightwing retards would love to be able to hunt and kill liberals, or put them in camps, or try them for treason etc, etc. Head over to redstate or lgf for some of that lovin.
December 27th, 2007 at 9:59 am“… and those of us who know the truth will still know the truth…”
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 27, 2007 @ 9:36 am
“However, the fact remains that states in the Rocky Mountains, the Great Plains, and the South are consistently worse off in all sorts of indicators of social dysfunction (out-of-wedlock pregnancy, narcotics use, etc.) If you want to argue that it’s a result of income differences, then that sorta takes the “values” issue off the table.
*****
The politicians from these states who trumpet their “superior values” are a product of the cultures who elect them, after all, so clearly these are cultural issues. A culture that would elect a politician who advocates a demonstrably inferior social program like abstinence-only sex education is clearly dishonest enough with itself that it can’t deal realistically with teen pregnancy.”
For example, divorce rates are higher in red states than blue states even though they passed resolutions banning gay marriage because they supposedly want to protect marriage which they don’t practice.
Another indicator we might take a look at is teen pregnancy rates, and I predicted that teen pregnancy rates would be higher in red states than they are in blue states and I found this to be overwhelmingly true. So, it makes one wonder whether these folks “walk” the “talk”. It doesn’t appear that they do. And while they rail against the northeastern and west coast “liberals”, it appears when you look at the data that these “liberals” do walk the talk.
***
Saturday, October 13, 2007
Abortion rate falls in places where it’s legal, birth control available
Once again, empirical evidence proves conservative arguments completely wrong:
A comprehensive global study of abortion has concluded that abortion rates are similar in countries where it is legal and those where it is not, suggesting that outlawing the procedure does little to deter women seeking it.
Moreover, the researchers found that abortion was safe in countries where it was legal, but dangerous in countries where it was outlawed and performed clandestinely. Globally, abortion accounts for 13 percent of women’s deaths during pregnancy and childbirth, and there are 31 abortions for every 100 live births, the study said.
The results of the study, a collaboration between scientists from the World Health Organization in Geneva and the Guttmacher Institute in New York, a reproductive rights group, are being published Friday in the journal Lancet.
“We now have a global picture of induced abortion in the world, covering both countries where it is legal and countries where laws are very restrictive,†Dr. Paul Van Look, director of the W.H.O. Department of Reproductive Health and Research, said in a telephone interview. “What we see is that the law does not influence a woman’s decision to have an abortion. If there’s an unplanned pregnancy, it does not matter if the law is restrictive or liberal.â€
But the legal status of abortion did greatly affect the dangers involved, the researchers said. “Generally, where abortion is legal it will be provided in a safe manner,†Dr. Van Look said. “And the opposite is also true: where it is illegal, it is likely to be unsafe, performed under unsafe conditions by poorly trained providers.â€
The data also suggested that the best way to reduce abortion rates was not to make abortion illegal but to make contraception more widely available, said Sharon Camp, chief executive of the Guttmacher Institute.
The study also shows abortions are declining worldwide due to wider use of birth control practices, but right-wingers want more abstinence-only education (like we have here in Texas – the state with the highest teen pregnancy rate).
The number of abortions annually fell to under 42 million from 46 million between 1995 and 2003, with rates decreasing most significantly in Eastern Europe, said the report from the Guttmacher Institute and the World Health Organization.
The number of abortions fell most in developed countries where it is legal compared to poorer countries where it is largely banned and considered unsafe, the researchers said…
The report said an estimated 20 million unsafe abortions occurred in 2003, 97 percent of them in developing regions and places where the procedure is banned.
“Each year, about 70,000 women die due to unsafe abortion and an additional five million suffer permanent or temporary disability,” Paul Van Look, director of the WHO’s department of reproductive health and research, said in a statement.
So basically, if “pro-lifers” are really interested in reducing abortion and upholding the “sanctity of life,” they’ll make sure it’s safe and legal (so women don’t die), and rare by also supporting increased access to contraceptives and sex education (which reduced unwanted pregnancies).
Footie, is there ever anything yer NOT wrong about?
December 27th, 2007 at 10:00 amO. Bigfoot
The US is founded on secular principles, including tolerance of other people’s religions (Which goes against the ten commandments) freedom of speech (Which again, goes against the ten commandments) capitalism (Jesus wasn’t pro the rich, and threw a thromby at people practicing free market economics in his local temple) Democracy (Which contradicts Saul, David, and again, Jesus as none of those were elected leaders) a rebellion over taxes (So much for give unto Ceasar) and the general principles spelled out in the enlightenment.
Indeed, according to the treaty of Tripoli, the US didn’t have any problems dealing with Muslims specifically because the US was never founded on Christian principles.
December 27th, 2007 at 10:06 amCaptainMantastic
Or a bit like you saying “If you support abortion you support the mass murder of little babies.”
December 27th, 2007 at 10:07 amActually, I’ve been certified as accurate 98.7 percent of the time.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 27, 2007 @ 10:03 am
Oh, you’ve been “certified”, alrighty… what’d ya do, take yer temperature ‘n add a tenth of a point?
December 27th, 2007 at 10:08 amBruce. That’s a little like me saying. “If you oppose the President’s anti-terror measures, you are guilty of the mass murder of the victims of future terror attacks.â€
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 10:03 am
Uhhh, Mantastic? I could have sworn some of the Right Ring’s leading *ss trumpets, yer Bill Orallys ‘n Heil Hannitys, so to speak, had expressed EXACTLY this sentiment.
December 27th, 2007 at 10:11 amComment by O. Bigfoot — December 27, 2007 @ 10:01 am
More like exposing your double standard. You are all for life being sacred provided it is making someone else’s life miserable, and doesn’t cost you anything.
The second someone suggests something like public healthcare? Pfft.
December 27th, 2007 at 10:14 amWhile Bush was busy making this decision to ban stem cell research based on a fictional book, he was also ignoring Presidential Daily Briefings about the coming 9/11 attack. He ignored every warning because he didn’t think it was important.
Meanwhile, John Ashcroft was given the same warnings, and decided not to fly commercial anymore.
They protected themselves, but did nothing to stop the 9/11 attacks. They could have even just alerted authorities to be on the watch for suspicious activity.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/07/26/national/main303601.shtml
December 27th, 2007 at 10:18 amPsst… mantastic?
(Footie’s wife is the “inflatable” kind, ya know?)
December 27th, 2007 at 10:19 amFact is, it’s not your right at all.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 27, 2007 @ 10:23 am
Nor is it yours…
Oh, the irony…
Nice Jingle Balls, BTW.
December 27th, 2007 at 10:25 amSimple.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 27, 2007 @ 10:30 am
Right… simple “values” for a simple”ton”…
Ya know, ya try ta appear all clam ‘n collected, but ya give yerself away ev’ry time.. yer Jingle Ballsâ„¢ start ching-ching-a-lingin’ when ya it mad…
Ching-ching-a-ling…
December 27th, 2007 at 10:33 amand we’ll pick up the tab for that.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 27, 2007 @ 10:27 am
Good God, you’d blow the entire family fortune like that?
You’ll have to go out and pick up cans ‘n bottles fer half a day to refill yer coffers…
December 27th, 2007 at 10:34 am“No double standard at all. If you cannot afford to have a kid, don’t have sex. That’s where kids come from, you know?”
And if you get impregnated by your (step or real) father, or brother, tough luck!
“Personal responsibility is the standard. One is personally responsible for their own actions. Society is not.”
Tell that to the father, or brother, responsible for the impregnated girl.
Your assertion doesn’t work in the real world.
“Some of our best and brightest minds come from humble backgrounds.” What right of it is yours to determine who lives and who dies based solely on monetary issues? Fact is, it’s not your right at all.”
As do some of our worst killers. As a percentage of the whole, your group is quite small.
Comment by O. Bigfoot —
December 27th, 2007 at 10:37 amGregor: I understand what you claim to be the differences between an embryo, a fetus and a baby. I just don’t accept your artificial distinctions, e.g. your contention that a fetus becomes a baby at the moment of birth and not a moment earlier, and can thus be killed at the choice of “the woman†for convenience or otherwise up to the moment of birth.
Comment by good_golly — December 27, 2007 @ 2:24 am
——-
Do you believe the extra in vitro fertillization embryos are children being held in a frozen prison before they are mass murdered?
Is In Vitro Fertilization the American Holocaust?
December 27th, 2007 at 10:39 amComment by O. Bigfoot — December 27, 2007 @ 10:23 am
The sheer hypocrisy of that whole post is astounding.
First you blather on about personal responsibility, and then you go on about how monetary issues shouldn’t decide who lives or dies.
Yeah, um, so you support the right to life right up until it is outside of the womb.
December 27th, 2007 at 10:47 amBush to Constitution: tl;dr
December 27th, 2007 at 11:00 amOkay here is a hypothetical scenario:
Thembi is a teenaged prostitute. She has been in and out of juvenile prisons all of her childhood, she is suffering from AIDS, and her boyfriend has done a runner on her leaving her pregnant and desperate.
She goes through with the pregnancy, and the child is born HIV positive.
Without adequate medical care the child will die before the age of ten. It will likely never reach its majority even with medical care, though its life will be greatly extended.
You are in a position where you are presented with a choice: Either you could lobby government to provide medical care for the child out of your taxes, or you could leave it up to Thembi to deal with on her own. Remember, Thembi is a teenaged prostitute with AIDS who has been in and out of juvenile prisons all of her life and who doesn’t even have a steady boyfriend.
What is your decision?
December 27th, 2007 at 11:06 amOpen note to the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, Washington, D.C.
You suck.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:01 pmAhh I hate to comment on here, but…. Very few people on here (on either side) make any coherent thoughts at all. How a thread on stem cell research got to a childish (yes most people on here are childish) debate on abortions, I will never know. Clearly anyone that would relate abortions or human experimentation to stem cell research, does not understand anything about science or scientific research, and definitely nothing about modern medical research. Yes there is indeed moral issues when it comes to the issue of stem cell research, but none of them are the ones that are so commonly brought up by people against it. It is utterly foolish not to mention naive to base decisions about scientific research on science fiction. People that do not understand the difference should not be making the decisions.
The issue of abortions is not an easy one. Most issues are not, there are many gray areas (though many are simple, like that all people should have the ability to obtain and access to the same medical treatment regardless of their position in society. That is a clear human rights and moral issue, much like habeas corpus and torture, but I digress). When life begins is a very cultural issue (not a scientific issue, well not really because how do you define life? Is a prion a life form, its jsut a protien but they do transmit diseases and replicate, but again I digress.) Many cultures, like the Navajo believe that the spirit enters the baby when the baby first laughs. The belief that life begins at conception is a belief that is strongly held by many Christians and others, but not a belief that is either right or wrong. Beliefs and cultures evolve and thinking changes, in a 100 years whose to say that belief is still held (or that is isn’t for that matter). I for one do not agree with abortion (in most cases). I think abortion as a form of birth control is disgusting. I however, am in favor or a woman’s right to choose. Yes you can think abortions are wrong (in most cases) and still be in favor of a woman’s right to choose. I think there is a difference between a baby (a person with fully developed nervous system) and a fetus. When is the line drawn, I don’t know, maybe that is a line that shouldn’t be drawn. But to say that a woman who has an abortion is the same as a murderer. Or that having an abortion is that same as a person who beats and kills there baby (which happens all the time) or one that wraps there baby up and throws it in a dumpster to die is absurd.
The number of abortions should be reduced. This can be done by actual sex education (as opposed to abstinence only sex education), making birth control (condoms and contraceptives) available, making adoption more affordable, making it so babies can be dropped off at hospitals with no questions asked, universal healthcare (so woman can get birth control, proper care when they are pregnant), education (people in low-poverty areas that receive poor educations, since education is not equal just like healthcare, are more likely to get pregnant at a young age, not be able to support their children, have fathers that are not around) etc etc.
Sorry for the long post, but this will likely be my last one since the childish bickering that goes on here (from both sides of an issue) is beneath me.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:25 pmThis is too funny. The antagonists come on here and call progressive “murderers”, due to some that support stem cell research. These are the same “trolls” who defend water boarding.
HAHAHAHAHAHA!
Okay, let’s summarize, shall we:
Researching TISSUES to possibly help humans with disease: BAD
Simulating drowning to “acquire” information (in violation of the Geneva Convention): GOOD
What a bizzaro world you Bushites live in!
December 27th, 2007 at 12:41 pmThe “Decider guy” can’t distinguish between fact and fiction. Of course this is the same guy who believes that he can communicate directly with the Big Guy.
December 27th, 2007 at 1:00 pmFortunately, my wife is as strong an opponent of abortion as I am, perhaps even stronger since she is a woman. And while there is no way to determine what reality would bring, asking her just now about your hypothetical situation provided me with my answer to you.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — December 27, 2007 @ 10:14 am
But you two don’t have any children. Is she infertile so it’s not an issue?
December 27th, 2007 at 2:12 pmFirst, many abortion opponents, I feel add to the propensity for abortion by relying too heavily on abstinence only programs, while they oppose earlier sex education and condom and birth control use (especially for the unwed), that I believe could help avoid many abortions.
Comment by CaptainMantastic — December 27, 2007 @ 10:51 am
I really disagree with this statement. Until you have sex education that actively considers the emotional needs of the female students, you’re only training the females to be the objects of the male students’ desires. It’s about much more that the correct names of the parts and how to put a condom on a banana.
From
http://www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/abstinence/A000002153.cfm
Much more at the link.
Caution: This link is to a “Focus on the Family†web site.
December 27th, 2007 at 2:15 pmGoing through and reading a good chunk of this thread after the fact and I have to say I think the trolls won this one. Not because they added anything intelligent to the topic. Nope they won it when they were able to unquestioningly change the topic to abortion. Well played A$$ holes.
Anyhow the whole issue of abortion is one that republicans do not want to ever go away. Their whole strategy is to segment the market and capture each segment. They want voter A to believe that abortion is the main issue that candidate 1 believes in and that candidate 1 is better for them than candidate 2. Meanwhile they also go after candidate 2 and convince him that gun control is the main issue that candidate 1 believes in and that candidate 1 is more in tune with voter 2’s views than candidate b…etc… Cover a whole bunch of issues and you have the market effectively segmented. Segmenting ha worked wonders for the republicans it gets them large numbers of single issue voters who side with them on their one hot button issue when that voter probably has no otter reason to vote republican other than the issue at hand. This strategy wins them elections.
And winning elections is why they can not and will not let any segment be tampered with. Think about this, the republicans effectively made torture the law of the land. They have effectively removed the right to a trial should the president designate the charged as a terrorist. They have effectively neutered the fourth amendment. They have been able to do these things with a compliant congress, a willing president and a media machine that sells the story as they present it. They have done all of this and have made no moves toward abortion? Heck they could have passed laws easily yet they CHOOSE not to because they need to keep that market segment alive and need the issue available for future race.
But beyond that and getting back to the topic, I don’t care what your political stripes are when I say this…it should scare the crap out of every American out there that the president made a decision based on a fictional novel written 70 years ago. And made that decision when passages from the book were read to him out of context without him knowing the whole story.
December 27th, 2007 at 3:14 pmOnce again, the subject of the story has nothing to do with abortion. The story is about George Bush, a man who demonstrates contempt for science, basing a policy on his fear of a novel.
I can’t imagine worse criteria for a decision on a scientific issue.
BTW, “embryonic stem cells, are no more “human life” than a brain tumor.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:21 pmIT IS AN EMBARASSMENT TO HAVE A ‘FICTITIOUS’ PRESIDENT WHO DOES NOT READ BOOKS NOR TRAVELED BEFORE BEING PLACED/MADE/NEVER ELECTED PRESIDENT. PEOPLE AROUND THE GLOBE ARE WATCHING THIS! SOMEONE HAS TO READ A BOOK FOR BUSH!
December 27th, 2007 at 4:27 pmI wonder who will read his indictment to him.
And when.
That should spread a chill over the room and joy over the land.
Comment by eve
December 27th, 2007 at 4:27 pmEXCELLENT POINT!
A friend sent this link to me. Enjoy!
Think about it: scientists, through the “miracle†of human reason, have eradicated diseases for literally billions of people through medicine, created light and warmth in winter through electricity, bread for the hungry through improved agriculture, knowledge of “the heavens†through astronomy, knowledge of creation and generation through biology and genetics. They’ve literally given man the “miraculous†power to fly around the earth and to the stars; to speak face-to-face from opposite ends of the earth (and from the moon); they’re close to creating life itself, and have already created a doubled average lifespan for all of us in a mere century.
http://beyond-school.org/2007/12/25/truly-critical-thinking-about-science-religion-and-goodness/
December 27th, 2007 at 7:58 pmGeorge W. Bush READS??????
I DON’T THINK SO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
December 27th, 2007 at 8:46 pmCould this be a coincidence, dan bernstein back peddled his license to public domain very recently, could there be a conspiracy?
What was going through GWB’s mind at the time when he created the ban? “Breath in, breath out” perhaps?
December 27th, 2007 at 9:06 pmBush is not your leader, he is simply a figure head. The neo-cons who have hijacked the Globalization movement (code for One World Government) are neo-malthusians, and based on Bushes assigned reading lesson, limited though it was, anti-utopians. Their vision of the future is Orwellian. Hard Fascism and not Green Socialism. The future is bleek.
The reason they do not want stem cell research being done is simple. It has nothing to do with ethics. The research in stem cells will provide cures to diseases that kill people and allow people to live longer, and who will be a costly burden on society for longer, and consume more resources. They do not want to increase longevity in the general population (except for themselves), indeed, many of them see the critters as a virus, consuming finite resources and endangering Mother Earth. They see a need to reduce populations by 80-90% at some point. Once that is done they can focus on extending longevity.
Eugenics was funded by the Tax Free Foundations (Rockefeller, Varnegie, Harriman) in the early 20th century, and are those behind the Globalzation movement. The concern is that the human evolution has been held back in modern civilization. Population reduction through genocide and sterilization, abortion (for all the lip service, abortions continue business as usual) and birth control, and selective genetic breeding (as in the Brave New World) are seen as tools to get us back on track. Those efforts to get girls vaccinated with a HPV vaccine before puberty and make it mandatory are very suspicous, and may be related to this (or not). But the potential cost seems to far outweigh the benefit, and it is not consistent with their policies of abstinence vs safe sex, so I am suspicous.
December 28th, 2007 at 1:55 amHuxley would b!tch-slap Bush for saying that. I am thinking little Georgie didn’t get what Huxley was saying.
December 28th, 2007 at 2:54 amComment by Severus
I agree. Lets end abortion so we can get on with other issues. Just to see what plays out. I would like to end abortion just to end the debate. What would all these morons do next if abortion was ended?
December 28th, 2007 at 10:26 am#322 that is not at all what I was saying, thanks for grossly misinterpreting what I have to say…good job. I’m saying that the republicans have a vested interest in keeping the abortion deate alive forever. Sure ending abortion would cause many of those voters to re-think (or maybe think forr the first time?) about who they would vote for. But then again the republicans would come up with a new way to segment the market once again.
December 29th, 2007 at 11:29 amSo I take it that, if you can just get some face time in the Oval Orifice, you can read the President of the United States some carefully selected propaganda and get a social agenda to match!
I propose “1984,” as per one suggestion above, also parts of “The Dispossessed” by Ursula LeGuin, and great swaths of my current favorite, “The Shock Doctrine” by Naomi Klein.
—————
December 30th, 2007 at 7:00 pmKill your TV, and free your mind.