Nutjobs Ranting About Politics.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by bilmore
It was an avowed liberal who did that editing, mirroring the reality that liberals have been responsible for so much more chilling of speech throughout history than any Ashcroftian crowd has ever dreamed of, despite the popular meme.

(Just kidding, RT.)

((Sort of.))

Whoa, there. At least some little part of his original post remains. When the stormtroopers from the right read my words of hope and recognized them as a beacon of hope and rally point for all oppressed persons of wit everywhere, the ENTIRE POST was deleted. Disappeared. Gone. Vanished. Except for the copy on slave's hard drive. RT gave wonk the kid-glove treatment by comparison (and I'm sure he enjoyed it).

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Whoa, there. At least some little part of his original post remains. When the stormtroopers from the right read my words of hope and recognized them as a beacon of hope and rally point for all oppressed persons of wit everywhere, the ENTIRE POST was deleted. Disappeared. Gone. Vanished. Except for the copy on slave's hard drive. RT gave wonk the kid-glove treatment by comparison (and I'm sure he enjoyed it).

I missed it, but I'm guessing you said something along the lines of "Bush really isn't an evil madman."

And you expected such blasphemy to stay?

Naif.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by bilmore
I missed it, but I'm guessing you said something along the lines of "Bush really isn't an evil madman."

And you expected such blasphemy to stay?

Naif.

Hey bilmore, you had to be pretty bent out of shape last week when Bush floated the idea of switching from an income tax to a national sales tax. Here you've paid an income tax through your whole career, and now, on the eve of your golden years, as you and your geriatric pals get ready to spend the money you've amassed, you find out that he's planning to whack you again. That can't have gone down well.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Whoa, there. At least some little part of his original post remains. When the stormtroopers from the right read my words of hope and recognized them as a beacon of hope and rally point for all oppressed persons of wit everywhere, the ENTIRE POST was deleted. Disappeared. Gone. Vanished. Except for the copy on slave's hard drive. RT gave wonk the kid-glove treatment by comparison (and I'm sure he enjoyed it).

Only on LT can the unwritten word achieve such cult status. The dead post lives on.

¡Desea vivo el poste muerto!

¡Desea vivo el poste muerto!

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by bilmore
Overwrought hyperbole. Someone - someone we all know a little (at least) about, and have some respect for - made a judgment call. Maybe we disagree with it. Maybe not. Cut some slack, and move on.

I made a judgment call, and I thought, given Wonk's subsquent amendment, that he agreed with it. I apologize if that's not what he meant, and he's free to switch it back if I erred.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Hey bilmore, you had to be pretty bent out of shape last week when Bush floated the idea of switching from an income tax to a national sales tax. Here you've paid an income tax through your whole career, and now, on the eve of your golden years, as you and your geriatric pals get ready to spend the money you've amassed, you find out that he's planning to whack you again. That can't have gone down well.

Not so much. My income keeps rising, and will likely continue to do so. I've already made enough property buys to keep me sheltered from the coming storms, and they are suitable such that I won't feel any huge need to buy more. I already own most of the big-ticket toys that I've wanted (discipline? we doan need no steenkin discipline!). The kinds of expenses I'm looking at in the near-to-mid future involve non-taxable things like colleges, criminal defense costs, and the like.

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by bilmore
I know little of this topic, but my impression is that what he's blocking involves fetal stem cells, that those cells are only available from dead feti, and that he believes that, if one opposes abortion, one must also oppose the use of those aborted feti, from where, I presume, most such cells come.

So, in the anti-abortion crowd's minds, and, obviously, in Bush's mind, you are choosing your life over the lives of others.

BB-

Hi! Actually, the big debate is not over "fetal stem cells", its about "embryonic stem cells." i.e. the cells are harvested after the embryo has been alive for about 2 weeks (I think), before it gets to the fetus stage.

Moreover, the embryos involved in the research aren't taken from abortions. They are basically the leftovers/extras from the vast fertility industry we have in this country. Those "extras" are eventually destroyed if not used.

This may change the moral calculus a bit, although everyone should realize that this is one piece of a "slippery slope" issue with very serious moral implications.

A continuum of such issues which evolves as technology advances. See, e.g., The current practice where some parents have new children to create tissue, marrow or organ donors for existing ill children. One end of the continuum may one day be the possibility (seen only in SciFi now) of creating and raising human clones as new bodies for rich old people.

There is some line that our society should not cross, and as a general matter, it is indecent for any society to cannibalize its youngest members to prolong the lives or increase quality of life for its oldest. Where you draw the line all depends on your definitions.

S_A_M

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Gattigap
Only on LT can the unwritten word achieve such cult status. The dead post lives on.

¡Desea vivo el poste muerto!

¡Desea vivo el poste muerto!

I don't know what was in ss's post to get it deleted, but big fucking deal. Spacefuck has over 3000 posts and, while he's funny on fashion, he never said one coherent thing here. I just flushed some toilet paper with shit on it. is that censorship?

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I don't know what was in ss's post to get it deleted, but big fucking deal. Spacefuck has over 3000 posts and, while he's funny on fashion, he never said one coherent thing here. I just flushed some toilet paper with shit on it. is that censorship?

The dead post was from fashion. 49 - 38 (catching up!).

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Gattigap
OK, I went back to the article. The best argument I think you could muster for Williams' grudging support of taking a dollar from his cold, dead hands to build a road or raise an army is that he doesn't call those things out in particular for his wrath.

All else in his article speaks with the fervor of the converted, and I see his reasoning and his rhetoric creating precious little daylight for any justification for government's "theft."

See my prior post. It was in part II

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by bilmore
Problem is, I don't think you can present this as a moral question while acknowledging that you find some point along the continuum away from the zero-point to be acceptable. He's left with an "it's immoral if you want to spend more than I want to spend" position. If he wants to declaim that taxation with the explicit goal of taking from one to simply give to another in order to equalize resources is immoral, that's fine, but that's not the argument that I saw. He's still then left with the "we choose to spend on a common-good basis" argument, and all he can argue is that he has a better idea of what constitutes "common good".

Do you not see a distinction between taxes spent on the military versus welfare?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
BB-

Hi! Actually, the big debate is not over "fetal stem cells", its about "embryonic stem cells." i.e. the cells are harvested after the embryo has been alive for about 2 weeks (I think), before it gets to the fetus stage.

Moreover, the embryos involved in the research aren't taken from abortions. They are basically the leftovers/extras from the vast fertility industry we have in this country. Those "extras" are eventually destroyed if not used.

This may change the moral calculus a bit, although everyone should realize that this is one piece of a "slippery slope" issue with very serious moral implications.

A continuum of such issues which evolves as technology advances. See, e.g., The current practice where some parents have new children to create tissue, marrow or organ donors for existing ill children. One end of the continuum may one day be the possibility (seen only in SciFi now) of creating and raising human clones as new bodies for rich old people.

There is some line that our society should not cross, and as a general matter, it is indecent for any society to cannibalize its youngest members to prolong the lives or increase quality of life for its oldest. Where you draw the line all depends on your definitions.

S_A_M

You provide a solution to your own dilemna...

If the stem cells we're talking about are not yet fetuses and are not from abortions, then there's no reason no to use them.

If something is going to be wasted anyway, why on Earth wouldn't we put it to good use, particularly for a cause as noble as saving people from disease? I'm sorry, but I don't think this wanders into the slippery slope. Perhaps its near the edge where the slope begins, but to a rational person, this ain't the slope.

The problem is that the pro and con sides to this issue have realized that they can only get what they want by playing it as a zero sum game. They've taken a page from the pro-choice and pro-life crowds. Pro-choicers don't really feel comfortable with partial birth abortion, but they know if they view it as a front line. If they fight there and lose, they've still got waht they really wanted. Pro-lifers don't feel comfortable with the idea of forcing raped women to give birth, but they know if they give an inch, they're ceding a the debate - the old slippery slope again.

Its really a shame - people are being denied a cure because neither side is willing to bridge their differences and talk honestly. My guess is that most people in America would honestly talk about abortion as a necessary evil and could probably come up with a compromise, and the same goes for stem cell research. unfortunately, the vehement minority fringe idiots lord over the organizations that control the debates and refuse to talk to the opponent.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Do you not see a distinction between taxes spent on the military versus welfare?

Certainly I do. Do you see the similarities?

They both simply represent some level of common effort for some agreed-upon social goal.

We may differ as to how much we should take from the private for public purpose, and we might also disagree as to whether certain expenditures actually serve a public purpose, but, again, those become arguments of scope, not of right. "Too much" necessarily admits that some amount is appropriate.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Its really a shame - people are being denied a cure because neither side is willing to bridge their differences and talk honestly. My guess is that most people in America would honestly talk about abortion as a necessary evil and could probably come up with a compromise, and the same goes for stem cell research. unfortunately, the vehement minority fringe idiots lord over the organizations that control the debates and refuse to talk to the opponent.

No, people are being denied a cure because the President has made a moral decision in line with the religious views of a small but vocal minority. This is not about controlling the debate -- we have plenty of that -- it's about federal policy.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
. . . the President has made a moral decision in line with the religious views of a small but vocal minority.

But, as a point of consistency, he holds those views himself, so it's less of a pandering thing than it's being made out to be here.