FlaSoxxJim

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 05:05 PM) A tumor is technically a form of human life as well, no? Absolutely, just one that doesn't know how to take orders.

QUOTE(Steff @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 04:28 PM) While this is true, the effective % are so low, and the additional estrogen from the "overdose" of BC pills is not good, they don't push this practice. No they don't, that is true. It's more a 'nonindicated use.'

I've "met" - in a passing, can I have your autograph?, fanboy sense of the word: Ian Anderson, Martin Barre, and Doane Perry of Jethro Tull Andy Partridge, Colin Moulding, and Dave Gregory of xtc Dweezil Zappa and FZ bassist Scott Thunes Adrian Belew and the other members of the raisins/Psychodots/Raisins Jazz drummer Billy Cobham I have the autographs from each of those encounters The hilight of my fanboy life was meeting Stevie Ray Vaughan after a Foellinger (sp?) concert in 1987, and getting him to sign my Telecatser. I've also been in the wrong place at the wrong time and partied to excess with the percussionist from Art of Noise and the bassist for Flock of Seagulls, but I wouldn't have known them if they bit me on the ankle.

QUOTE(Cerbaho-WG @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 02:42 PM) Because in my mind it isn't murder, although I'm opposed to third trimester abortion where the fetus is fully formed. Look, if you're having an abortion through RU-486 (the day after) arguing that you're killing something is completely asinine. You're flushing out some dividing cells which could or could not be naturally aborted anyways. When you move up to the fetus stage, it's "life" is dependant on the mother. Take out a second trimester fetus and it's not going to survive on its own. Likewise with a first trimester fetus. You're not destroying life, because life hasn't even occured. Many doctors agree that a fetus cannot feel pain up until six months, and you're really going to argue that you're killing life when this fetus doesn't even have basic motor functions? And many have twisted the facts to support their own agendas. But if people are going to cry "damn liberal jew run media," here's a report from the Journal of the American Medical Association, which last time I heard was unbiased, but I could be wrong: http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/294/8/947 The 'when can it live on its on?' argument is an equally pointless one, IMO. How long is a full-term baby going to live on its own without care? Point of clarification. Your ARE destroying 'life' when you terminate a first trimester fetus. Whether that life is a human being is the issue for most. You destroy 'life' when youre sperm goes down the shower drain. Human life too, albeit in a dead-end haploid form. Not a human being though, of course I really dislike all the legalistic arguments about conception and life and human life. Haploid egg and sperm are 'human life,' but not human beings. Fertilized diploid ovum, blastula, gastrula, and embryo are also all 'human life,' but not (yet) human beings. Defining THE spot in the continuum where it's now a human being is artificial and a losing exercise. None of that is to be construed as an argument against pro-choice, merely an argument against ignoring facts of biology for the sake of constructing a legalistic argument.

QUOTE(Balance @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 03:21 PM) Point of clarification- Are you talking about the "Morning After Pill" or RU-486? They are not the same thing. It doesn't affect your argument, but I think it's important that people know there's a difference. The Morning After Pill is simply a higher-dose birth control pill. It's no different from the birth control pills that millions of women use every day. It works by suppressing ovulation. The Morning After Pill is only effective up to 48 hours after unprotected intercourse. RU-486, on the other hand, will cause an abortion and will work after fertilization and implantation. I'll go back to my lurking, now.... But that is not entirely true either. The double-dose of the pill that comprises the "morning after" pill not only supresses ovulation, but also can terminate blastulae that have implanted by creating an inhospitible environment in the womb. Like RU-486 it can therefore can also work after fertilization and implantation.

Also very pleased to see this happen. I'm interested in knowing the speed with which fishing will be phased out and what types are included, but this is a unique system in serious need of protection. It will also be interesting to see the reactions from Hawaii's pro-development camps to the upland usage regulations that will almost certainly come of this.

Funny stuff that. I can't wait for Farce of the Penguins to come out.

The 'when does life begin' question is a distraction, and a silly exercise, even when caveats of viability etc., are thrown in. When should a dividing mass of diploid cells be considered a human being is slightly more relevant, and certainly lots of legal arguments on both sides hang on it. The two aspects I regularly interject into this argument are, first, that the notion that there are scores of people who get abortions as casually as they would get a pedicure is a fanciful one. Almost to a person on the pro-choice side of the arguments here, people say they find the thought of terminating a pregnancy repugnant and theat they would nevver do it if they were in that position. I count myself in that group. It is not something the majority of women opting for do lightly and without a lot of conscience searching. Second, I'll reiterate a little quip that is neither here nor there, just food for thought. Greater than 50% of all pregnancies end in spontaneous termination – natural abortion, if you will. In most of these cases, the woman doesn't even kbow she was pregnant. All of you who are so completely intractable in your stance that human life begins at conception with no exceptions have got to be royally cheesed off at that wacky God, who is numerically the single biggest baby killer of all and murders tens of millions of unborn babies a year. Then again, who are we to question teh Ineffable Plan®. After all, maybe the 50+% of babies God is smiting in the womb were going to be the gay ones? We all know how how God can't stands the ***s.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jun 14, 2006 -> 10:41 PM) It's not a semantic difference at all. I think that judges and juries should take motivation into account when determining penalties for crime. But I don't think motivation should be in and of itself a crime. Hate crime legislation makes motivation a crime. And that is wrong. In that case it is my understanding of the law that is faulty. I assumed elevating a criminal offense to the staus of hate a crime in effect triggered the consideration of stiffer penalties basd on motivation.

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Jun 14, 2006 -> 07:56 PM) tacking on time for 'hate' is a very slippery slope, my friend any group that is unpopular at a certain time can be given extra long prison sentences for no apparent reason. That is certainly true enough, as we saw with mandatory sentences for first time drug offenders during the hey day of the 'war on drugs.' QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jun 14, 2006 -> 08:07 PM) Motivation for a crime should affect a punishment, but it should not be a crime unto itself. OK, then maybe there is a semantic issue. But I certainly see the 'hate' descriptor as defining the motivation behind the nominal offense. You can't get arrested for hating. You can get arrested because you bash members of a group because you hate them. And you should risk a stiffer penalty if your crime is directed in a premeditated fashion at members of a group you hate.

. . . and Robert Blake.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jun 14, 2006 -> 07:10 PM) Let's hope they don't. Every crime is a hate crime. I get the sentiment but I don't agree. School kids rabndomly destroying some property is differnt, and not so pregnant with deliberate and directed malice as singleing out the artistic works of a race, religion, sexual orientation, etc., and making a spectacle of their destruction. That's my take on it, at least.

Hope they find these clowns and tack hate crime on to the vandalism and arson/endangerment charges that are pending.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jun 14, 2006 -> 01:49 PM) The 20ish year old high school student, football player and thespian from Arrested Development. How could I forget about that son of a GOB?!?

QUOTE(minors @ Jun 14, 2006 -> 01:27 PM) But why would a person want to kill there own child? It is murder in the worst sense. And you keep on thinking that way about the lord. Damn, The Lord doesn't even rate capital letters anymore. The entire nation has lost its way. :headshake

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jun 14, 2006 -> 12:55 PM) I believe the amount of money unaccounted for in Iraq is roughly enough to rebuild NOLA's entire Levee system. And that's just the stuff that's gone missing from the old UN Oil for Food dollars, not even counting the $ that the U.S. has shipped over. And mybe we'd be able to look for that missing Iraq money if GWB hadn't made a signing statement basically saying that the Inspector General coildn't audit or investigate any missing or misspent Defense money. Damn, they have this s*** down cold.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jun 13, 2006 -> 11:59 PM) As for support, you obviously wouldn't have the father paying more support because the mother doesn't have to feed & clothe the child yet. True, but there are most often added health care costs during pregnancy that I believe should be accounted for if it is an alimony situation.

QUOTE(Soxy @ Jun 14, 2006 -> 10:09 AM) Hahaha, I just got an e-mail from Steven Holt. STEVE HOLT! Whch one, the photojournalist, the songwriter, the vegetarian bodybuilder, the jazz pianist, or the on-set medic for Dawn of the Dead?? I loves me some Google.

QUOTE(minors @ Jun 14, 2006 -> 02:50 AM) People who pray on Natural dissasters and people's suffering are the worst scum out there luckly they will all rot in hell for there actions. Katrina Spell/grammar check, Brother. You make Gage look like a Rhodes Scholar.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jun 13, 2006 -> 04:44 PM) Perhaps he'll just marry Lisa Loeb. And maybe Los Lobos will play at the wedding.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jun 13, 2006 -> 01:37 PM) At least it seems that the President's office itself wasn't involved, and that appears to be a good thing. Or, to take an opposing view, it might reaffirm that the people in the President's office are still the best in the business when it comes to hiding bodies.

QUOTE(Soxy @ Jun 13, 2006 -> 10:34 AM) On the website it's right below the Bush in Iraq story. On a side note, how sad is it that we have to have a news story saying that government members WON'T be indicted? It's certainly legitimate news.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Jun 13, 2006 -> 10:31 AM) You won't hear much about it. I'm curious as to what page that NYT story was on. I'm not sure it even made the print deadline, since the online story is only timestamped at 6:30 am. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/13/washingt...artner=homepage

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Jun 13, 2006 -> 10:15 AM) This guy should find a new career. In light of the NYT story today, yeah, I'd say Leopold's stock just plummeted.