Where are my notes? Oh here they are. Let's go back to last night.
Little Tommy Daschle had to get up and start spouting his liberal bullshit. OK. What's wrong with the country?
Health care up. Thank Babyface for that since he got over $150 million from the insurance companies. Malpractice rates go up. Health insurance goes up. Here's sumpin' amazing. He was able to channel a baby in the womb who needed to be delivered via Caesarian. I guess that means that the baby could feel things. I wonder why he cannot channel a healthy baby that is getting its brains sucked out via partial birth abortion? D'ya think that baby might be feeling things. "Three o'clock - starting down the birth canal. Four o'clock - My feet are out. Feeling good. Four fifteen - Ouch! What the fuck was that? Whoa! That hurts!"
Gas prices up. I've discussed this many times before. It's the Dimocrats who will not allow us to build more nuclear power plants. It's the Dimocrats who will not allow us to drill in ANWR. It's the Dimocrats who will not allow offshore drilling. It's the Dimocrats who will not allow us to build more dams. Gotta protect the smail darter. It's the Dimocrats who will not allow us to build more refineries. If you like high gas prices, kiss a Dimocrat.
Here comes Howard Dean. Let's have a primal scream. Crap! They have him on Prozac also. So what does Dean have to say.
Take the country back. Fuck you Howie! You can't have it!
He's from the Dimocrat wing of the Dimocrat Party. In other words the moonbat communist wing.
He wants a jobs program. Howie. Gummint doesn't create jobs. Remove stupid regulations and onerous taxes and get the fuck out of the way. That was the nice thing about Clinton. He was too busy getting blowjobs to fuck up the economy.
Anti-war - Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. You're also from the appeasment and surrender wing (AKA the French wing) of the Dimocrat Party.
Then he told us about some idealistic twit who sold her bicycle to donate money to Howie. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA! What a booger eatin' moh-ron!
Reclaim the American dream. Here's the American dream. My sister and I are products of a dysfunctional family. We grew up poor and now we are rich. We did it without the help of the Dimocrat Party. My sister got a scholarship. The only gummint assistance I got was the GI Bill in return for me enlisting in the Navy. The American dream is hard work. It is not handed to you by politicians, especially socialist assholes like Howard Dean.
Gephardt was in there somewhere. Who cares?
Some dude in a wheelchair came out to introduce Ron Reagan Jr. I bet his father is rolling in his grave. Anyway this guy was talking about stem cells maybe making him able to walk again. Dream on dipshit! Ain't gonna happen. And Christopher Reeve ain't gonna walk again either. Here's why. Even if they can get the spinal cord neurons to regenerate (Which currently they will not do.), the lower motor neurons will have died off. They can regrow, but only to a maximum of two feet. Also, there is the problem with muscle atrophy. Trust me. I'm a paraplegic. I've researched this shit and kept up to date on it.
I couldn't take much more so I didn't see Ter-RAY-sa speak but I heard she was way over-medicated. My friend Cindy, who is a nurse, said she thinks she was on Valium.
I only saw one speech tonight. I have to save myself for tomorrow when the Poodle speaks. I'm afraid I may fall asleep so I have to pace myself.
The speech I watched was Al Sharpton's. Finally we see the real face of the Dimocrat Party. After all this bullshit about how the Dimocrats want to unite the nation we see what they really want.
Bush lied - Yada yada yada blah blah blah. Been there. Done that. Saw the move. Got the t-shirt. Next.
Supreme Court. Bush is a racist. If he had been president in 1954 we would not have had Brown vs Board of Education. Fuck you, you RWPP (Race Warlord Poverty Pimp)
Old people have to go to Canada to get their prescription drugs. I guess that's only fair since Canadians have to come here to get health care. And will someone tell me where it is in the Constitution that there is a right to health care and prescription drugs?
Multiculturism. He bitched about the fact that immigrants have to learn English. Ya see, Reverend Al doesn't want immigrants to learn English. If they don't they will be dependent on gummint. The quicker a newcomer to this country learns the language, the quicker he can succeed. Dimocrats do not want people to succeed on their own. They want people to rely on gummint. Reverend Al needs poor people, otherwise he has no reason to exist.
Every vote counted. Does that include the military? Jesus H. Christ! We did count every vote. In Chicago we even counted votes of people who were dead. Show me one person who was denied the right to vote. Just one!
Reparations. Bullshit. Bullshit. Bullshit.
That's it. I've got to reset my bullshit meter so I can try to listen to John Fonda Kerry tomorrow night. I hope I'll be able to stay awake during his speech.
See ya tomorrow.
Update. I did watch part of Babyface's speech until my bullshit meter pegged. Is he gonna do sumpin' about that thing on his mouth? Eeewwww!
Got a letter from my nephew in Iraq. I will post it in the near future. It seems that the Iraqis actually like Americans. Imagine that.
Posted by denny at July 28, 2004 09:31 PMNow - reparations w/canceling AA programs - pay them off - it's the American way.
No more College Diversity in Physical Education degrees or some such nonsense.
Wow, so many people actually having to find work in the real world.....
Posted by: Sandy P on July 28, 2004 11:40 PMDenny ... my fellow-vet?
Are you short-circuiting that wonderful-voice?
Not gonna say with readership comes responsibility, but I wonder if I've detected a sip-too-far of the Bo Jolly?
Doesn't really matter 'cause I'll read you until my dying-day. Before my demise as a blog-pioneer (back in the '70's! ... we won't go there), folks used to commend me for the incisiveness of my commentary.
Then they began to suspect that each of my paragraphs was sponsored by another Sip-O-Sumpin' ... and they wondered if they were hearing me .. or something less-pure.
At any rate, I'll be back tomorrow.
Cheers!
Posted by: Dan S on July 29, 2004 12:12 AMHoly sh*t, what a wacko Howell Raines is. What you gather from his ranting is the following: He's a Marxist, through and through. A man who sees the world only the Leftist prism of economics, class structure, and group interests.
Posted by: addison on July 29, 2004 12:22 AMDan S - Actually it was Chardonnay.
Posted by: Denny Wilson on July 29, 2004 12:29 AMThere was one part in Edwards' speech, where he was talking about Iraq and our soldiers -- he made a statement that got REALLY lukewarm applause. I forget what exactly it was.
Wasn't some poll conducted that said 90% of the people attending the convention were anti-war?
Posted by: Eric on July 29, 2004 01:02 AMAhhhh!
Denny, my comment was brought to you by: "Beck's! .. when you're having more than one! :)
Sleep well, my friend!
Posted by: Dan S on July 29, 2004 01:31 AMEric,
According to Dennis Prager, it was delegates who were polled. Ninety-seven (97) percent believe the troops should be brought home and that the loss of American soldier life is not worth it. The demographic information on the delegates is pretty interesting as well: 51% have post-graduate degrees, more than half work for government offices, they are fairly wealthy ("party of the little people"), and more anti-war than the average Democrat.
------------------------------------------------
Denny,
Here is a description, from a nurse, of a procedure both Edwards and John "I believe life begins at conception" Kerry openly support (as shown by their votes):
Consider first the question of partial-birth abortion. Nurse Brenda Pratt Shafer was "pro-choice" when her agency assigned her to work at an Ohio abortion clinic in 1993. What she saw shocked her to the core.
"I stood at the doctor's side and watched him perform a partial-birth abortion on a woman who was six months pregnant," Shafer testified in 1995. "The baby's heartbeat was clearly visible on the ultrasound screen. The doctor delivered the baby's body and arms, everything but his little head. The baby's body was moving. His little fingers were clasping together. He was kicking his feet. The doctor took a pair of scissors and inserted them into the back of the baby's head, and the baby's arms jerked out in a flinch, a startle reaction, like a baby does when he thinks that he might fall. Then the doctor opened the scissors up. Then he stuck the high-powered suction tube into the hole and sucked the baby's brains out. Now the baby was completely limp."
The nurse concluded, "I never went back to the clinic. But I am still haunted by the face of that little boy. It was the most perfect, angelic face I have ever seen."
Does John Edwards hear the voice of that baby, or thousands of others like him? Apparently not, since the first chance Edwards got to vote on the bill to ban partial-birth abortions in 1999, he voted against it. (link)
Kill babies, not criminals. Or something.
Shocking news just in....
Ohio delegates put Kerry over the top......well ok several other states had to pass thier voting spot so Ohio can have bragging rights again! If memory serves me correctly didn't they get the say in '84 '88 '92 and '00. All because of the theory if you dont win Ohio you dont win. Since this apparently means alot why didn't Algore recount Ohio several times to try and steal votes there?
Posted by: Greg DiCroce on July 29, 2004 01:17 PMdid you ever go into schokol to be told that another of your friends was dead? a friiend who died from a muscle-wasting condition, mmuscles which according to current reserch, stems cells could have helped to re generate? no? then shut the fuck up - niether of you know anything about stem cells, and only oppose it because you oppose abortion. I too am against aborrtion, but I have a wide enough mind to realise it is sometimes necessary. umbilical stem cell research can and will work, no thanks to ignorant people like you.
i was starting to respect ou. but you lot are a pack of simple minded Nazis who only care about yourselves. taxation is necessary: get over it you retards!
Posted by: matthew g on July 29, 2004 01:39 PMYa'know, the Bush administration was the first period that Stem Cell Research even got federal funding.
Ya'know, the ban was not on research, but on further federal funding for that research.
Ya'know, adult stem cells are proving more effective than infant stem cells in some areas.
Ya'know, your friend's life may be as important as a baby's, but at least your friend had a life at all.
Ya'know, most of the diseases people claim stem cells are the miracle cure for, like Alzheimer's, are among the diseases that current research has shown no indication of being anywhere near being able to use stem cells on.
Ya'know, given that federal funding for stem cell research started just a couple years ago, even if it hadn't been restricted recently, there's just about NO GODDAMN WAY there would be a cure for your friend yet. So your friend would still be dead. Yeah, I'm being harsh here, but the facts are harsh.
Posted by: Dave on July 29, 2004 01:49 PMhttp://stemcells.nih.gov/info/scireport/
earlier i got a little hot, abd very agry. sorry. I should evidence my arguments.
"adult stem cellls" i will look into.
Posted by: matthew g on July 29, 2004 01:58 PMI will endeavor to keep you informed of any further information I can find on this amazing revelation.
Posted by: addison on July 29, 2004 02:05 PMmatthew g, FUCK YOU AND THE WANKER COCK YOU SIT ON DAILY!! Noone here is against umbilical stem cell research. You're the fucking retard. Umbilical stem cell research...ready?...DOES NOT REQUIRE AN ABORTION!!!!!!! HELLO YOU FUCKING PRICK! THE UMBILICAL CAN BE REMOVED AND HARVESTED AFTER BIRTH YOU FUCKING ASSHOLE!!! DON'T CALL US NAZIS, AND GO TROLL ANOTHER WEB SITE YOU FUCKING RED COMMUNIST!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Paul on July 29, 2004 02:09 PMHey Paul.. easy up there.
Posted by: Addison (the other one) on July 29, 2004 03:20 PMh grow up, paul. of course I know about umbilical stem cell research.
I won't call u a faccist/nazi if u dont call me a red communiist. both are equally insulting, and are equally accurate.
Posted by: matthew g on July 29, 2004 03:24 PMMatthew:
"did you ever go into schokol to be told that another of your friends was dead?"
Yes, several times. Car wrecks, accidental suicide once, and one time, a heart failure from someone waiting on a transplant.
"mmuscles which according to current reserch, stems cells could have helped to re generate?"
That's not right. You mean, we HOPE that that is what we will be able to do, at some point in time. Research might be promising. If it worked, then it would be a much simpler question.
"niether of you know anything about stem cells, and only oppose it because you oppose abortion."
I don't oppose abortion. I don't really oppose stem cell research, either. But Bush has _not_ opposed the research, merely the funding. (And stopping any "new" human lines coming into play - which doesn't really affect you as you research effects)
Which means that your government is free to fund it all it wants to, anyway. Or you. Or Bill Gates.
There is a concern that people could try for "designer" stem cells - much as some people have been known to try for "designer" babies to save other family members or children. To say that that would not happen flies in the face of what we've already seen with transplants. Should that be the final word? I don't think so, but someone who worries about that does have a valid concern.
"umbilical stem cell research can and will work, no thanks to ignorant people like you."
That's why they call it _research_. We don't know what stem cells will do, won't do. We don't know if there's any realistic ability to rehabilitate at all. Maybe there is, maybe there isn't. Maybe in 10 years, it'll be a moot point with other therapies or treatments.
You've got to calm down and not let your emotions run away because you feel strongly about something. So far, life is a terminal forecast, we all die sometime. Sure, do I want more and better treatments for things? Damn straight. But we're _getting_ there. We've got treatments for things we didn't know were problems 30 years ago.
I heard the Democrats weigh in heavy on stem cells the other night when I was at the airport, and the TV was turned up. Funny thing.
They first attacked the big medical companies. Talked about how evil they were. How Bush had made sure that people couldn't get health care, etc. etc. Big Bad Health Companies.
But oh, by the way, We LOVE stem cells! Come! Research! We'll fund you! Errr. Anybody else see a problem there?
So they're going to slam the door shut on the companies making money off of successful drugs - but oh, hey, go find out what stem cells can do.. and we'll discuss slamming that door later. After of course, people are demanding the fruits of that labor....
Posted by: Addison (the other one) on July 29, 2004 03:31 PMMatthew:
"I won't call u a faccist/nazi if u dont call me a red communiist. both are equally insulting, and are equally accurate."
Actually, it would be a good exercise to research what a fascist does stand for, expect, demand. The word is used as an epithet by many people without regard for it's meaning. (my current pet peeve is the misuse of "decimate").
The definition of C/communism is likewise interesting, and worthy of some discussion. But basically, you have adhered pretty decently to some definitions of communism, but Paul has (with that post) just been insulting. He's not called for anything along the lines of what a Fascist or Nazi would have supported.
Posted by: Addison (the other one) on July 29, 2004 03:57 PMaddison:
Yes, I heard something about that. Didn't he win it? Before he surrendered it?
Posted by: Addison (the other one) on July 29, 2004 03:58 PMYes, I do, Matthew. A friend of mine died last year. ALS (Lou Gehrig's Disease). Had the stem cells done at the price of draining his life savings, cashing in stock that he had been holding for his daughter, and being given money by friends and relatives. Didn't do any good. Died anyway. Fifty-one years old.
So yes, I do know.
Elizabeth
Imperial Keeper
--then shut the fuck up - niether of you know anything about stem cells, and only oppose it because you oppose abortion.--
matthew, neither do you know anything about stem cells by that comment.
You've got a computer, internet and time, start researching.
There are breakthroughs being made by adult stem cells - there's more potential than they thought. All W is talking about is not federally funding and using new embreonic (sp) cells.
After the genome situation, I can understand why private and corp. money is the way to go.
Cracking the genome under US federal research about 15 years, IIRC. Then Amgen(?) came along said we can do it sooner and I think they did it in 3. My, my the fed scientists got into a tizzy. Wanted to slow the company down, finally had a joint announcement.
Private industry can do it better, faster and cheaper.
Posted by: Sandy P on July 29, 2004 04:15 PMAfter all, matt, it's all about nuance.
Somewhere on Roger Simon's blog I posted a link on stem cell updates. I thought I had sent an email, but I couldn't find it.
Don't know if Roger has a search feature, but I think the original post had to do w/W's environmental policy. Most probably in June, maybe early July.
Posted by: Sandy P on July 29, 2004 04:19 PMWhy are you people wasting your time with this moron. He's been on this site long enough to know that we are not a bunch of Nazis! If he hasn't figured that out by now, then he's just full of shit and trolling. So, no Addison, I won't ease up. I don't appreciate people calling people Nazis out of immaturity and ignorance. Once again, hey matthew g, FUCK YOU.
Posted by: Paul on July 29, 2004 04:23 PMUsing human embryos reminds me of reading the chapter in James Michener's The Source about the people who sacrificed their first born baby sons in the fires of Molech to ensure a good yield in their olive groves and safety for their communities. How is this any different?
Posted by: Sue Bob on July 29, 2004 04:33 PMSandy:
http://www.google.com/search?num=20&hl=en&lr=lang_en&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&c2coff=1&q=%22sandy+p%22+site%3Arogersimon.com&btnG=Search
I only get the one response. Right time, different subject.
Posted by: Addison (the other one) on July 29, 2004 04:40 PMSandy:
Unless you meant Roger *L* Simon. :)
http://rogerlsimon.com/archives/00001028.htm
Wow, you comment a lot, don't you? :)
Posted by: Addison (the other one) on July 29, 2004 04:43 PMOOPS!
Why, yes I did, thank you addison.
SAHM w/1 child. Spend WAAYYYY too much time on the computer and not enough time cleaning and ironing. I do get around, almost like a full-time job.
And Roger LLLLLLLLLLLL does have a search option.
I still suggest matt use it.
Posted by: Sandy P on July 29, 2004 04:51 PM My father had Alzheimer's and Parkinson's and there is no way he would have ever chosen embryonic stem cell as if it would even work! It's a moot point on the Alzheimer's because I have no doubt that the Dems will eventually require 'useless feeders' to be eliminated. It will be the answer to Social Security and Medicare found in Al Gore's lock box.
Denny, isn't that thing on Edward's mouth a genital wart?
Devoid of the scientific reasonings, I can't comprehend why one would sacrifice a brand new life in order to possibly save an older, clearly more dilapidated life.
Posted by: agdegro on July 29, 2004 06:38 PMAddison
"Breaking News: John Kerry was in Vietnam"
I also just heard he "earned" 3 purple hearts. Wow. Who would've known? Guess they've been keeping that a secret. Maybe I'll go register to vote for this "war hero".
I wonder if they, by chance, have any video of his heroic exploits in country? Say, 8mm home footage?
Although I heard he was planning to move into the white house many years ago. Something about him throwing these medals (or ribbons) over the white house fence? Maybe that was just so he'd have les to carry there when he moved in. Hmmm.
Posted by: Daniel on July 29, 2004 07:15 PMMatthew - I enforce Godwin's Law on this site. Calling someone a Nazi is not allowed. Normally I would ban you for that, but I'm allowing you to stay because I like you and I think there is hope that you may learn sumpin' by hanging out here.
Paul - Lighten up. Matthew is young and as such is an idealist and has liberal beliefs. We need to educate him not call him names.
Everyone - Reread my post. I would just love it if stem cells would give me back full use of my facilities but it ain't gonna happen.
There are plenty of stem cells available in the umbilical cord. All Bush has done is said that the gummint wasn't gonna fund any more embryonic stem cell research other than the existing lines. We are on a slippery slope here. What's next? Cloning embryos to grow a human and harvesting organs?
Remember, it is the Dimocrats who support delivering all but a healthy baby but his head and then killing him by sucking his brains out. I'm sorry. That ain't an abortion. That is infanticide and it is sickening. Read the description in an earlier comment. How someone could perform this procedure and sleep at night is beyond me. That is sumpin' straight out of Nazi Germany and in this case Godwin's Law doesn't apply. I would like everyone who is in favor of "partial birth abortion" be forced to watch the procedure and then see how they feel about it.
Posted by: Denny Wilson on July 29, 2004 08:48 PMWell Denny, the glass is half full. My apologies to all, even you Matthew.
Posted by: Paul on July 29, 2004 09:09 PMWell, matt, Vodkapundit agreed on SCR and here's some responses - will be 3 posting cos I'm a nincompoop when it comes to puters:
I'm surprised to see Vodkapundit fall for the 'Bush is against stem cell research' lie. Bush has only said the fed govt shouldn't be financing the use of embryonic stem cells, and this is not a bad position to take because embryonic stem cells are not - as the press would you have us believe - the BEST stem cells. In truth, due to their purity they are too 'malleable' and prone to mutation. People are walking now, who could not walk before, by using stem cells from NASAL CAVITIES and umbilical cords. We don't need the embryonic cells, and I am suspicious of the strange insistance by some that we do. Vodkapundit, please don't fall for it. YOu're too smart for that.
Posted by: Sandy P on July 29, 2004 11:57 PMEmbryonic Stem Cell research is a pipe dream, the DNA from you're body won't match that of the implanted stem cells and therefore you're immune system will attack it, rending it useless. Now adult stem cells have more potential because their DNA matches you're own body
--
That should start your and our education.
Posted by: Sandy P on July 29, 2004 11:58 PMDenny, Paul, and everyone, Matthew did indeed get very upset last night, he has perhaps too high expectations for the stem cell research. He has possibly much to gain from the research being successful. The explanation of why the government funding was cut was different to what we read here, so was very useful.
I'm trying to get Matthew to research more and comment less, though the response to his outburst was very good in itself, since facts and links were posted he might not have found otherwise. The name calling is just plain wrong, and we will have a longer discussion about that.
Thanks again,
Matt's dad
Let me open by offering my siceare and unreserved apologies to denny, paul addison and everyone else who posts here. you are niether faccists nor nazis. My desire for medical research goes to thhe core of myy being - I swore that to myself - and whhen I even so much as suspect that someone is trying to prevent it's progressed, I see it almost as an insult.
seems i'm in for one of dad's talks.
addison is right when he says my beliefs are based on hope. This hope is probably empty, and false...
I wrote this a while ago. Please read, and feel free to leavee a message - I owe denny some bandwidth
No, Matthew, research may springboard from stem cells into something else. Keep the faith, keep on researching.
Elizabeth
Imperial Keeper
Dayvon - As I said Matthew is welcome here as long as he adheres to the rules. We are a rough and tumble group on this site and most of us are very passionate conservatives or libertarians. As such we do have a problem with socialists. When any of us call Matthew a socialist it is not meant as an insult (well sometimes it is) it is just a reflection of what he posts in the comments. Being called a socialist (or a communist which is the next step past socialism) is nowhere near as bad as being called a Nazi. None of my readers believe in lining people up and having them carted away to camps to be gassed.
There is a preview function for comments. Remember: Preview is my friend.
Posted by: Denny Wilson on July 30, 2004 09:23 AMMatthew - Here is a good link to check out. It has multiple links to other articles to support it.
Posted by: Denny Wilson on July 30, 2004 09:43 AMDenny - I followed that link, and agree with almost every word. To be honest, I also agree with you guys that abortion is wrong, and should be avoided whenever possible. To allow it would open a moral flood gate: people would seek to abort babies wwhich aren't perfectly normal, which would have meant the deaths of many people I know. Moreover, there is only a small gap between abortion and killing 'abnormal babies after birth, which apparrently certain sections of the scientific community promote. (please see http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=47&ItemID=3560). I find this totally abohrrent, and would oppose it unto my death.
although some abortions are needed for medical purposes, I no longer see the need for it. After all, an unwanted child could be adopted after birth rather than being killed. The only reason I was for abortion was the need for stem cells, and denny's link cleared that issue up. In this case, and it rathher pains me to say this, liberalism has it wrong.
Posted by: matthew g on July 30, 2004 11:12 AMMatthew:
"My desire for medical research goes to thhe core of myy being - I swore that to myself - and whhen I even so much as suspect that someone is trying to prevent it's progressed, I see it almost as an insult."
To your credit, you realise this. But I'd take out the "almost".
And as you seem to be noting, it misleads you into attacking motivations rather than effects. And that's not as effective. Think about it like this, if someone holding a bible was to scream in your face that you're the spawn of the devil, because you want to use embryonic stem cells ripped from the innocent in the womb - do you think that would change your mind in the slightest? Or harden your resolve and determination that the opponents were nuts?
What if I don't support stem cell research because I think the money would be better spent elsewhere, say in nanotechnology? (Remember, this is researching, where we find out what works.. or works better).
That doesn't mean you should give up on hope, or give up on asking for money. But there's a basic law of economics that (especially) Liberals tend to forget.
Everything is scarce. In other words, there's a finite amount of money, work, everything. Now, in practical matters, you can presume some things are near infinate - or losing them is irrelevant, say, the sun's energy (lose it, and it's a moot point about 30 minutes later). There's only so much money to go around. Ignoring the diminishing returns issues, and the effects of increasing taxation, basically, there's only so much money and research time we _can_ do. So we have to select among those as to be the best return on investment. Add to that other economic effects (basically, the amount of elasticity - nanobot researchers can't just jump right into stem cells and back willy nilly).. and it gets more complicated.
Probably part of what I ought to suggest to you is a good Economic 101 book - people don't realise it, but Econ is actually a damn good social examiner and predictor. How much econ have you had?
Posted by: Addison (the other one) on July 30, 2004 11:19 AMMatthew:
Good for you on changing your mind.
One note - I don't oppose abortion. At least first trimester. For a number of reasons. It gets quite complicated, but basically, as I see it, there are some great benefits and costs that abortion provides. Know what TANSTAAFL stands for? "There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch"
http://info.astrian.net/jargon/terms/t/TANSTAAFL.html
It's freed women to be less tied down by biology, and I think that's part of our impressive culture and progress. It's also allowed people to be less tied down by biology, and I think we can agree that in some senses, we've lost some culture and morality.
(Plus, the legal implications inherent in stopping abortion are chilling - at least to me. http://john-ross.net/abortion_ii.htm - Check that out for the potential implications that could occur. (And http://john-ross.net/abortion,_mole.htm is worth reading, too).
Posted by: Addison (the other one) on July 30, 2004 11:27 AMHeavens, now I feel bad. His DAD posted? Oops. I should have omitted a couple of those bad words. Matthew, Addison is a superior being who has much to offer you. Research and keep the faith, young grasshopper.
I'm against abortion (unless the mom's life is threatened). Life begins once the sperm meets the egg. At that point, the being is entititled to the inalienable rights discussed in our Declaration of Independence. Any abortion outside of the exception above should be tried as a murder case. I won't get myself started on partial birth abortion.
Stem cell research can be accomplished outside of abortion, and I will go find evidence to support my claim. I'm all for it, provided that no babies are involved. The abortion lobby has taken stem cell research hostage to further justify their murderous agenda. Stem cell research has absolutely nothing to do with a woman's choice.
I am very passionate about my abortion beliefs. It is not justified to murder in the name of science.
Posted by: Paul on July 30, 2004 11:58 AMI've written this before: I morally oppose abortion, but I would not make it illegal. I took a lot of grief from my readers for this, but I don't want to go back to the days of back alley abortions. Now saying that, I am totally against "partial birth abortion" which I see as infanticide. Also, there should really be no need for abortion if people are educated enough to use proper birth control. I would say that most abortions are done for reasons of birth control because the mother fucked up. This is irresponsible behavior on the part of the mother, and the father also and the aborted child is the one who has to pay the price. Arrrrgggghhhh! How did this thread become a discussion on abortion?
Paul, Denny, my post earlier about name calling was about Matthew's use of the N word, for the second time. I have no issue with anything Paul wrote, it's Denny's site. It's all part of the reason why we stop by here and read people's views. I like to believe though that we wouldn't need to use those words if we were sitting across a table with a bottle of Chardonnay. Not to mention that language like that sounds really silly coming out Matthew's talking machine ;)
as addisn points out "It's freed women to be less tied down by biology, and I think that's part of our impressive culture and progress. It's also allowed people to be less tied down by biology, and I think we can agree that in some senses, we've lost some culture and morality."
how can one balance a woman's right to choose with a childs right to life? it's hard.
i'm not a grasshopper.
"Stem cell research can be accomplished outside of abortion, and I will go find evidence to support my claim. I'm all for it, provided that no babies are involved. The abortion lobby has taken stem cell research hostage to further justify their murderous agenda. Stem cell research has absolutely nothing to do with a woman's choice." - quite correct, in all probability.
Posted by: matthew g on July 30, 2004 12:41 PMI'm a former scientist. Embryonic stem cells are all hype, like flying cars. They're always going to be 10 years in the future, in the meantime the gov't scientists just want something cool and new to put on their grant applications.
They did one trial implanting embryonic stem cells in Parkinson's patients (supposedly the easiest disease to cure with them) and they got so much WORSE that they halted the trial. You don't see that too often.
As the above posters put it; if it were so great, private companies would be doing the research--they're not restricted. In fact, the gov't is only forbidden from funding NEW lines. Plenty of funded experiments on extant embryonic stem cell lines
Matthew G--"grasshopper" was the affectionate term that David Carradine's Dojo Master called him in the old T.V. show "Kung Fu". It wasn't meant to be an insult, it was actually meant to be affectionate.
It's good that you're open-minded enough to have a change of heart about certain things. (I've been paying close attention to this thread, I just haven't been commenting.) It's a pleasure to meet both you and your father, and I certainly hope that you two stay around this site for a long time! :-)
--Denita TwoDragons
Posted by: Denita TwoDragons on July 30, 2004 04:44 PMI higly recommend seeing the movie "Kung Fu" its like a pilot episode for the tv show, or something like that. Anyway, its a great movie to watch.
Posted by: Deathknyte on July 30, 2004 05:09 PMI don't know about you guys, but I'm ready for some Saturday Boobage.
Posted by: Paul on July 30, 2004 05:53 PMDenny, I'm going to commit the "other" threading faux pau. ;)
You are a generous man, but I think you're wasting your time: long years as a forum mod and admin have taught me that it's not humanly possible to educate anyone who writes in txter and 12 year old AOLer. They're already beyond help - lack of writing discipline and lack of thinking discipline become irrevocably tied together.
[And now everyone can dogpile on me for being a "grammar-nazi". ;) Wah.]
Posted by: Ironbear on July 31, 2004 02:44 AMPaul:
The "traditional" view on fetal life is that it started at the quickening, i.e., when the fetus starts to move. That's usually in the second trimester. Biologically, there is no one point that can be identified as "when life begins"--it's all a continuum. While the merger of two haploid cells into a diploid one is certainly significant, it's hardly the only benchmark on the way to a live birth.
It seems that many on this site are morally opposed to abortion. Denny, though personally opposed, wouldn't ban it. My respect for him has increased again. My response to anyone opposed to abortion: no one who wasn't pregnant ever needed an abortion. If you're opposed to abortion, work to prevent unwanted pregnancy. (Hint to certain religious types: advocating abstinence is an unrealistic, willful ignoring of human nature.)
Posted by: Squidley on August 2, 2004 08:43 AMAddison (the other one) wrote:
" (my current pet peeve is the misuse of "decimate")."
The meaning of words may change over time. This is a fact, demonstrated by all the languages of the world, over and over again. Not all meanings change, and they don't do it in predictable ways.
If you really want to use words in their "original" meaning, I have a wee test for you. Let's see how you do:
True or False:
1. Liquor contains alcohol.
2. A girl is female.
3. Some deer live in trees.
4. Nice has positive connotations.
5. Sad refers to sorrowful feelings.
Answers: 1 F, 2 F, 3 T, 4 F, 5 F.
Or at least, once upon a time. Check http://dictionary.oed.com/ for details.
I think that if you're going to be consistent, you need to use these words--and many more--in their older meanings, too. Of course, if you do so, you will me misunderstood, just as you will if you insist upon using decimate in its older, obsolete meaning.
Words mean what their users, on the whole, think they mean. Sometimes, usage changes, and no amount of wishful thinking or complaining on our parts will change that. (Example: gay.)
Posted by: Squidley on August 2, 2004 09:01 AM"If you're opposed to abortion, work to prevent unwanted pregnancy"
part of the problem is abortion is viewed often as just another means of birth control, so efforts in that regard wouldnt really be effective.
Posted by: daniel on August 2, 2004 04:14 PMdaniel, I think you're missing the point. If a woman doesn't get pregnant, she will never have to think about getting an abortion.
Consider sex education:
In Canada, England, France, The Netherlands, Sweden, and the US, the average age of first intercourse is about the same. However, the US has more than twice the teen pregnancy rates of the other countries. The difference? Those other countries have effective, consistent sex education programs. (See http://www.caps.ucsf.edu/sexedtext.html)
Your thesis--that efforts to prevent unwanted pregnancy "wouldnt really be effective"--is false.
I said it before and I'll say it again: no one who wasn't pregnant ever needed an abortion. If you're opposed to abortion, work against unwanted pregnancy, keeping in mind that abstinence is not a realistic policy.
Posted by: Squidley on August 3, 2004 04:59 AMNo, you're missing my point.
There are those women who get pregnant because they don't take other preventive means because they will simply abort an unwanted pregnancy. In other words, for those women, if abortion is easily available, they have less incentive to take the other steps to prevent getting pregnant in the first place.
I'm not saying I'm against sex education and providing those preventive possibilities, especially to younger folks, but the fact some view abortion as just another means of birth control should be considered as well.
Posted by: Daniel on August 3, 2004 12:09 PMOh, you mean like in Japan. Here, the problem is exacerbated by how difficult it is to get the Pill. This is fueled by physicians' lack of concern about what's best for their patients, coupled with their greed: an abortion is more profitable than a prescription.
What is your proposal for reducing abortions?
Posted by: Squidley on August 7, 2004 07:18 AMSquidley - I agree about the pill. It is utter bullshit that health plans will cover Vagra but not birth control pills. I am all for easy access to birth control pills, morning after pills and any other type of birth control. I'm all for sex education and I see no problem with schools (Gasp!) handing out condoms. The way our adolescents are bombarded with sex today it's inevitable that it's gonna happen. It would be nice if kids would abstain but they are walking hormones. I was a walking erection when I was 17.