Chavez loses bid to become president-for-life

[MrRain422]

Why is an embryo that is a product of rape less valuable than one that is the product of consensual sex?

[ikol]

New Data on Abortion-Crime Link

 

I don't see how that affects the abortion debate one way or another. Using that kind of utilitarian reasoning could lead one to advocate some pretty horrible things.

[MrRain422]

I don't see how that affects the abortion debate one way or another. Using that kind of utilitarian reasoning could lead one to advocate some pretty horrible things.

 

Yeah, the Freakonomics guy, who I think was the first to propose this link, has said that he does not think it should make a difference in the abortion debate, but produced the data instead so that people would stop attributing the drop in crime inaccurately to other things, as an accurate understanding of what does and does not prevent crime is necessary to forming sound crime prevention policies.

[Spawn's dad]

And not a bad one. I personally think it has to do with some compulsion to control women, a compulsion I do not share.

 

though admitedly you'd rather be the spankee than the spanker. or sumthin'

[Sweet Papa Crimbo]

For you, but not for everyone.

 

 

 

 

Because the topic of personal liberties and freedoms was raised, and Mr. Golyadkin bristled at the thought of the government imposing higher fuel efficiency standards

[EL the Famous]

Executing an innocent person is irrevocable. And no, I don't see abortion as an equivalent. Fetuses are not people yet.

 

a healthy 24 month old fetus isn't a person...it has a brain, heart, organs, is a few months shy of coming out of the womb where then you would be consider it a person?

 

Why is an embryo that is a product of rape less valuable than one that is the product of consensual sex?

 

who said that it was? my point was that, it is really the only instance where a woman had no choice in becoming pregnant and carries with it a whole different rationale that i can truly empathize with in the context of making a choice to go this route.

 

again, i'm pro-choice...it's just that i'm not so quick to dimiss the numerous choices before it and, personally, one that i could not go through with. it has nothing to do with religious views either. i just think w/ as much information on both early-pregnancy and STD's, coupled w/ the easy access to birth control...it's irresponsible. i really hate it when this subject becomes a political and/or religious debate versus one of mortality and responsibility.

 

and, yeah, i don't see why the whole abstinence (from full-fledged fucking) thing is so incredulous...there are plenty of other ways for two people who dig each other to get off.

[MattZ]

a healthy 24 month week old fetus isn't a person...

 

Apparently, my joke from yesterday didn't stick. I will try one more time to set the record straight.

 

Sorry, I will bow out now. Carry on.

[Guest Golyadkin]

Apparently, my joke from yesterday didn't stick. I will try one more time to set the record straight.

 

Sorry, I will bow out now. Carry on.

 

and a caterpillar is not a butterfly...

 

Do note that Doug eats both of these creatures

[MattZ]

I think El F's point (and it's a fair one, I think), is that many pro-choice advocates argue that embryos aren't persons and so you aren't killing a person. But a 24 week old fetus is one that can survive on its own outside of the womb. If you accept for the sake of argument that an embryo is not a person, well, that embryo becomes a person at some point. Where is that point? At 9 months when it pops out? At 6 months when it is viable on its own? You could easily make an argument that it is the latter. If it can survive on its own, how is it not a person?

 

I have a habit of putting words in El F's mouth, but Bjorn, I think that's his point here. IMO, its a fair one. I certainly dont have any of the answers and I don't presume to know.

 

I fall into the camp of firmly pro-choice for others, but incredibly conflicted if it ever hit me directly...

[Spawn's dad]

I asked, as a supporter of Ron Paul, how does one square their distaste for government regulation vis a vis the auto industry, with Mr. Paul

[Good Old Neon]

Key words.

 

Fact of the matter is, nobody knows what is going to happen. The Earth has gone through rapid cooling and warming stages millions of times, and it is in one of those right now. I don't know what impact we are having, and here's the big news: neither do you. It is all conjecture. There are scientists out there who don't believe in global warming. Should they be ignored?

 

Climatology is a science that is still in it's infancy. Much of the future forecasting is based on outdated computer models. It is next to impossible to accurately predict anything when it comes to the climate, because there is so much to take into account.

 

I'm glad there was no mass media during 1816 (The Year Without a Summer). The fucking media blitz would have been unbearable.

 

Do I believe we need to stop consuming so much gas? Yes. MOstly because when we run out, we are fucked. Do I think we need more environmental awareness. Absolutely. The world is a beautiful place and there are so many wonders that we don't even know about and I don't want those dissapearing.

 

But we need to think long and hard about how and why we are making changes. 10 years ago, we were running around scared as hell that CFCs were destroying the ozone layer, and that would cause the world to heat up. Now we are worried about the atmosphere becoming filled with gas, and that will cause the world to heat up. 70 years ago, it was lead. I'm more of the opinion that GW is mostly a natural event.

 

But then, I'm just a crazy, racist, homophobic, registered republican who hates single mothers.

 

Well, the majority of climatologists and others within the field have done, I think, a fine job of illustrating that we have passed the point of conjecture

[Atticus]

shouldn't these governments be restricting our diets as well?

[Spawn's dad]

shouldn't these governments be restricting our diets as well?

 

 

New York's trans fats ban sets food trend for rest of America

BY JORDAN LITE

DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

 

Sunday, December 2nd 2007, 4:00 AM

 

Love it or hate it, New York's ban on trans fats has changed the way America looks at food.

 

In the year since the city Board of Health barred the heart-clogging oils in eateries, more than 50 national restaurant franchises have eliminated trans fats.

 

Puerto Rico, Philadelphia, Albany and Nassau County have approved restrictions while 16 states are considering bans.

 

"It was a success for New York City and another example of New York City leading the nation in public health and safety," city Health Commissioner Thomas Frieden told the Daily News.

 

Health authorities approved the ban last Dec. 5.

 

This September, the city bragged that 94% of its 24,600 restaurants were complying with the first phase of the ban. It outlaws cooking with oils and spreads, including margarine, that contain trans fats - synthetic molecules linked to high cholesterol.

 

Restaurants that violate the ban can be hit with fines ranging from $200 to $2,000. Many of the eateries that have been fined were caught using margarine.

 

The second phase of the ban, which prohibits the sale of prepackaged and baked goods with trans fats, will kick in July 1. It likely will be more difficult to enforce.

 

Sellers don't want to replace trans fats with saturated fats, which also are unhealthy. They also fear removing trans fats will make their recipes taste different and ruin the flaky crusts of their original products, said Sheila Weiss, director of nutrition policy for the National Restaurant Association.

 

Chuck Hunt, executive vice president of the association's New York State chapter, noted that many restaurants buy baked goods from other sources, "and there may be some difficulty in getting documentation to prove that the supplier didn't use trans fats."

 

Frieden said new trans-fat-free products are starting to come onto the market. He added that the city has a help center for eateries and is working with culinary trade groups to ease the transition to the July deadline.

 

It's unknown whether the city's policy will spread across the entire nation. None of the states where legislation is pending have passed restrictions.

 

Frieden also is locked in a fierce battle with the restaurant industry over another rule approved last December requiring eateries to post the calorie content of their menus where customers can see them.

 

While it was delayed by a lawsuit, a judge left the door open for the city to revise the regulation, which the Board of Health is expected to do in January.

 

Fans of the city's activism are betting on the Big Apple. The move could lead to more food industry changes in marketing practices, portion sizes and pricing schemes that encourage overeating, said Kelly Brownell, director of the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at Yale University.

 

Brownell said Frieden is "the first health commissioner in a major city or state who said, 'It's my job to worry about the long-term consequences of food.'"

[Atticus]

they'll have to pry my pizza from my cold dead (greasy) hands

[Spawn's dad]

think fast: petri dish or the pizza?

[Atticus]

unless the petri dish is deep with lots of cheese and toppings, I'm going with the pizza. Is the house on fire or something while I'm trying to make this important decision? cause that just makes the pizza more enticing

[EL the Famous]

I think El F's point (and it's a fair one, I think), is that many pro-choice advocates argue that embryos aren't persons and so you aren't killing a person. But a 24 week old fetus is one that can survive on its own outside of the womb. If you accept for the sake of argument that an embryo is not a person, well, that embryo becomes a person at some point. Where is that point? At 9 months when it pops out? At 6 months when it is viable on its own? You could easily make an argument that it is the latter. If it can survive on its own, how is it not a person?

 

I have a habit of putting words in El F's mouth, but Bjorn, I think that's his point here. IMO, its a fair one. I certainly dont have any of the answers and I don't presume to know.

 

I fall into the camp of firmly pro-choice for others, but incredibly conflicted if it ever hit me directly...

 

Dead on, especially the very last sentence...except maybe w/ the caveat 'firmly pro-choice after you have exhausted all other choices and realize exactly how irresponsible you've been to get pregnanant in the first place'. The XX% effectiveness of a condom does not make it okay for abortion to be considered an alternate type of birth control.

 

It's easy to make this one of those hardline us/them political issues on paper, but the reality is that there is so much more involved than just a right to choose and a lot of choices that were afforded to someone prior to choosing to go through with it.

[caliber66]

unless the petri dish is deep with lots of cheese and toppings, I'm going with the pizza. Is the house on fire or something while I'm trying to make this important decision? cause that just makes the pizza more enticing

Frankly, if your house is made of brick, you probably ought to leave the pizza in there. What with all the brick oven pizzerias operating out there. Might be worth the risk...

[Good Old Neon]

While you may not agree with it, the position is that abortion limits the personal freedoms of the fetus/baby. In the view of some choosing life trumps what they would perceive to be lesser personal freedoms.

 

Still, Chavez to abortion in 11 pages or less is stretching the bounds of credibility.

 

 

I think my issue with many pro-lifers is that they do not lend any credence to the idea of personhood. A fetus is undoubtedly human, as it will never reach full term as a Cockatoo

[Guest Golyadkin]

It's easy to make this one of those hardline us/them political issues on paper, but the reality is that there is so much more involved than just a right to choose and a lot of choices that were afforded to someone prior to choosing to go through with it.

 

Don't tell the networks or the politicians that... they will lose a lot of money.

[EL the Famous]

Pro-lifers screaming

[Good Old Neon]

anybody 'screaming' anything at anybody else in no way to go about things, on that i agree. i don't know the actual % of pro-lifers legitimately 'screaming' that at anybody and to hold someone's view of when life begins in whatever regard based on those folks, is just as disingenuous. they are out there, no doubt...but, again, the way they choose to coomunicate their belief shouldn't be a consideration in the discussion of the actual act itself.

 

i really don't get how those are not 'viable' choices in most cases...please explain in more detail, in your opinion, what would determine that they aren't. as the second part of that statement is completely unfounded either way and will vary from person to person, i don't find it to be that strong of a talking point.

 

as far as the whole awareness thing, did you see the national geographic special on multiple births? it was pretty amazing to watch how early foetuses start to interact w/ both their surroundings and their 'roommates'...

 

 

 

so, you can argue what constitutes true 'awareness'...but to qualify that by the degree one is truly 'self conscious and aware it has a future', you could then challenge a newborn in it's first few months of time out of the womb isn't worth keeping alive. much like your stance on 'the potential' implications to life via global warming, consumption, etc...the potential this human entity has to affect the world around us could and, IMO, viewed as just as important of a resource.

 

These are all good points.

 

You are putting words in my mouth though El, I did not say those are not viable choices in most cases, I said it is not a viable choice for everyone. My aunt works as a nurse and counselor for an abortion provider in Boston, MA. She counsels patients on all aspects of their pregnancies, whether they choose to carry a baby to full term or not

[Spawn's dad]

In a perfect world, all babies would be regarded as the amazing gift that they are, but that, unfortunately, is not the world we live in.

 

"Unfortunate, but not being the world we live in" could be said regarding quite a few of the viewpoints you put forth.

[Good Old Neon]

"Unfortunate, but not being the world we live in" could be said regarding quite a few of the viewpoints you put forth.

 

I fixed that for you.

[bjorn_skurj]

though admitedly you'd rather be the spankee than the spanker. or sumthin'

Dude! You PROMISED you would keep that between us!