StrangeSox

QUOTE (BearSox @ May 15, 2009 -> 01:04 PM) The thing is, this is a very serious and risky procedure to undergo chemotherapy. If it was a very safe medicine they were refusing to give the child, that'd be different. The child is 13, so it's not like he doesn't know what he's doing. From the article, it seemed both parents and the child all agreed to not undergo the procedures, and so I feel the government has no right to force him to go into chemo. Also, what about the first amendment? What's even more risky than chemo, with its 95% survivability for this cancer, is not-chemo, with its 5% survivability. At 13 you do not have the cognitive abilities to fully understand the situation. You're also very heavily influenced by whatever your parents tell you.

QUOTE (Soxy @ May 15, 2009 -> 01:01 PM) Yeah, I think this is a murky area only because it is a child. With Terri Schiavo, I was so disgusted with the court's intervention. But here, I'm uncomfortable--but I think it was the right judgment. Well, the court had to intervene in her case since it was a custody battle, more or less. Her husband wanted to pull the plug in accordance with her wishes*, her family wanted to keep 'her' going. I was more disgusted by Congress passing special legislation and one Senator making a "diagnosis" based on a 20 minute video. *supposedly. that's what the whole fight was over.

Parents are not dictators over their children. Children often need to be protected from their parents. This is no different. How can you draw a line between this medical neglect and food, shelter, clothing, hygiene, etc. neglect that isn't completely arbitrary? Should parents who are breathanarians be allowed to starve their child? Do you want your parents to have the ability to make that choice for you?

QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 15, 2009 -> 12:43 PM) Comparing Al Qaeda to Saberi is ridiculous - I'm sure she was there to kill thousands of Iranians and even has stated that cause to the entire world! Iran said she was a spy--her giving up state secrets could lead to the death of thousands of Iranians! If they tortured her into confessing that, they could easily show it to be 'true'! So, if we're not bound by some international rule, we should torture? edit: according to wikipedia, spies are considered unlawful combatants. So she's fair game. You can't be seriously saying that after your sarcastic "its always different" mantra the past few months.

QUOTE (Texsox @ May 15, 2009 -> 12:50 PM) No, it is a choice of two treatments. If the child still dies, can the parents sue the government for making the wrong decision? No, its a choice between treatment and woo. Medical treatment is far more likely to succeed than woo, so, no, the parents should not be able to sue.

It's medical neglect. If you allow medical neglect, why not nutritional? Who are you to say beating the child into submission isn't in the best interest of the family? While they aren't capable of forming their own legal contracts, medical treatments, etc., I don't view children as property or completely subject to the will of their parents, either. This issue is a philosophical mess inside my head, but I know where it comes out. I just can't explain it very well, and believe me, giving the government this sort of power makes me uncomfortable. I think this comment underneath the article illustrates my point a little more clearly:

Yes. Children need to be protected from their parents' absurd beliefs. This is frequently a problem with Jehovah's Witnesses.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 15, 2009 -> 12:00 PM) You of all people should know that isn't even in the same paralell universe. It's always different. Al Qaeda operatives have knowledge of plans to harm America or Iraq/AQ ties, therefore waterboarding is ok. Saberi has knowledge of plans to harm Iran/ conspired to harm Iran (according to Iran), so why isn't waterboarding ok?

nar⋅row-mind⋅ed [nar-oh-mahyn-did] –adjective 1. having or showing a prejudiced mind, as persons or opinions; biased. 2. not receptive to new ideas; having a closed mind. 3. extremely conservative and morally self-righteous.

Gee, Mr. Stroger, I didn't know taxes could be expensive! What a moron.

Anyone have any experience with this program?

Nice find.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 14, 2009 -> 01:37 PM) Why so quick to "not be sure" what Pelosi knew, but yet, anyone from tbe Bush administration has to be wrong? Track record?

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ May 14, 2009 -> 01:22 PM) I really don't think that makes a difference. Might as well come out with an all white [insert sport] since historically they were all white. Historically, HBCUs were created because blacks weren't allowed to go to other universities. NCAA is HWCU Football. I really don't see the problem. It's just college football teams from a specific group of colleges. I doubt the game would exclude any white players on the teams (especially since a few of these colleges have had white valedictorians lately and do not discriminate in their student bodies).

Obfuscate, obfuscate, obfuscate.

I love how he resorts to questioning Missanelli's resume and asking him how old he is.

QUOTE (kyyle23 @ May 14, 2009 -> 12:28 PM) Is there going to be a Latino Soccer game, followed by a white hockey game? Thats completely ridiculous It's a game about Historically Black College(s) and University(ies), not about black people as a race.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ May 13, 2009 -> 08:34 AM) Its pretty cool. There is alot of new stuff besides the main missions. They now have Super mutant overlords, which are pretty tough. Longer than The Pitt? That took about an hour total.

Morally repugnant and ineffective. Gotta love it.

Lostpedia has a collection (or at least they used to, haven't been over there in a while) of all of the literary/ historic allusions in the show. edit: Here's the philosophers http://lostpedia.wikia.com/wiki/Philosophy

He was 2-2 with a 4.81 ERA in September. His ERA climbed every month last year except for July.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 13, 2009 -> 02:17 PM) I agree with him about Gavin and agree with you about a replacement. The Sox can't upgrade an 0-5 8+ ERA Contreras. What is the next guy in line going to do? That's the worst part about this mess. KW apparently had no plans for Contreras or Colon either sucking or being injured for a length of time. Now we have Contreras gone due to performance, Floyd doing very poorly and you still have injury/ suck potential out there in Colon.

QUOTE (juddling @ May 13, 2009 -> 12:39 PM) I understand about making changes as the season goes on....i mean....the producers have said in the past the the role of Ben was orginally for only 4 or 5 episodes. When they saw what a great actor they had for the role they expanded it and wove it into the story. If something works (like Ben) then get keep it....if it doesn't (Nikki and Paulo) then get rid of it. I understand that part, but I was talking about their explanation for the time-loop that the watch is stuck in or Ben bringing Richard to tell himself to bring everyone back after he's brought everyone back. That's why time travel stories end up not working -- a big paradox ends up in there somewhere.

Sad report on the situation. The article is a little sensationalist, but you can read the transcript on the side. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/20...rash-ntsb_N.htm We definitely have the controls algorithms to fly planes all by themselves, but I don't know that the public would ever be comfortable with that. I wouldn't be. Captains for major airlines make good money ($150k or so), but a lot of pilots make next to nothing. That's the reason I didn't consider it for a career.

Fantastic.