(no subject)
5 Nov 2004 12:32 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
mayoraaseiAmerica is going to be testing bombs in Australia? WTF?? *Tears John Howard to shreds* The last time this happened people ended up keeling over with cancer.
Bloody self-centred America. Go kill your own people.
Those desperate to get away from Bush can try this. LOL.
And this sums up everything you'd want to say but not hear about the coming Bush administration.
He ran a jihad in the US so he can fight one in Iraq - drawing a flock of evangelicals, or "values voters" as they call themselves, to the polls by opposing abortion, suffocating stem cell research and supporting a constitutional amendment against gay marriage.
I wonder how many people opposing stem cell research actually know what it's about and the potential it has in medicine. If at the completion of the research, it means millions of people with incurable cancers, chronic illnesses and genetic disorders can be saved, then I'm all for it. It's alright now to appease any petty morals by attacking scientific research, but wait until you get old and hopelessly sick.
As my bio teacher pointed out smartly, "If you ban abortion, all that's going to happen is that women will be seeking backyard abortions, which is many times more dangerous." Done improperly, it could mean permanent damage to the uterus, and often, haemorrhage resulting in death.
Just listen to Dick (Oh, lordy, is this cuckoo clock still vice-president?) Cheney, introducing the Man for his victory speech: "This has been a consequential presidency which has revitalised our economy and reasserted a confident American role in the world." ..."confident" is not the first word that comes to mind for the foreign policy of a country that has alienated everyone except Fiji.
BWAHAHAHAHA. Poor Fiji.
America is hopelessly self-deluded about its role in the world =_______=;
Tom Coburn, the new senator from Oklahoma, advocated the death penalty for doctors who performed abortions and warned "the gay agenda" would undermine the country. He characterised his race as a choice between "good and evil" and said he had heard there was "rampant lesbianism" in Oklahoma schools.
James DeMint, the new senator from South Carolina, said during the campaign he supported a state party policy banning gays from teaching in public schools. "I would have given the same answer when asked if a single woman who was pregnant and living with her boyfriend should be hired to teach my third-grade children."
Capital punishment for abortion. Uh huh. What next? 3 years jail for mentioning euthanasia? =__=; WTF is rampant lesbianism??
And as IF a pregnant single woman living with a boyfriend is going to even register on 8-year-olds. I don't remember my year 3 teacher ever mentioning if she were married, divorced, gay, or necrophilic. (Bless her, she was a nice teacher, sorry about the example ^^;)
One thing's for sure...we're going to be seeing Interesting Times...and knowing Terry Pratchett's definition of Interesting Times...XD
Bloody self-centred America. Go kill your own people.
Those desperate to get away from Bush can try this. LOL.
And this sums up everything you'd want to say but not hear about the coming Bush administration.
He ran a jihad in the US so he can fight one in Iraq - drawing a flock of evangelicals, or "values voters" as they call themselves, to the polls by opposing abortion, suffocating stem cell research and supporting a constitutional amendment against gay marriage.
I wonder how many people opposing stem cell research actually know what it's about and the potential it has in medicine. If at the completion of the research, it means millions of people with incurable cancers, chronic illnesses and genetic disorders can be saved, then I'm all for it. It's alright now to appease any petty morals by attacking scientific research, but wait until you get old and hopelessly sick.
As my bio teacher pointed out smartly, "If you ban abortion, all that's going to happen is that women will be seeking backyard abortions, which is many times more dangerous." Done improperly, it could mean permanent damage to the uterus, and often, haemorrhage resulting in death.
Just listen to Dick (Oh, lordy, is this cuckoo clock still vice-president?) Cheney, introducing the Man for his victory speech: "This has been a consequential presidency which has revitalised our economy and reasserted a confident American role in the world." ..."confident" is not the first word that comes to mind for the foreign policy of a country that has alienated everyone except Fiji.
BWAHAHAHAHA. Poor Fiji.
America is hopelessly self-deluded about its role in the world =_______=;
Tom Coburn, the new senator from Oklahoma, advocated the death penalty for doctors who performed abortions and warned "the gay agenda" would undermine the country. He characterised his race as a choice between "good and evil" and said he had heard there was "rampant lesbianism" in Oklahoma schools.
James DeMint, the new senator from South Carolina, said during the campaign he supported a state party policy banning gays from teaching in public schools. "I would have given the same answer when asked if a single woman who was pregnant and living with her boyfriend should be hired to teach my third-grade children."
Capital punishment for abortion. Uh huh. What next? 3 years jail for mentioning euthanasia? =__=; WTF is rampant lesbianism??
And as IF a pregnant single woman living with a boyfriend is going to even register on 8-year-olds. I don't remember my year 3 teacher ever mentioning if she were married, divorced, gay, or necrophilic. (Bless her, she was a nice teacher, sorry about the example ^^;)
One thing's for sure...we're going to be seeing Interesting Times...and knowing Terry Pratchett's definition of Interesting Times...XD
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-11-05 07:46 am (UTC)*pause* oh it's non fiction eh? *dies again*
that so sucks. by the time we graduate we'll be dead. which means we won't. which means we won't die. which means.. *stuck in loop*
but seriously, that so sucks. the thing you mentioned about the stupidity of the stem cell research banning thing is interesting, recently I read something similar here; well, it's not similar, but it also raises questions about whether human lives are expendible in some circumstances (e.g. kill 10 to save 10000000).
I dunno where I stand about that actually, I mean, on one side, I believe I would say that saving 9999990 lives is a bloody good thing to do, but I have an uncomfortable feeling that if I needed to personally kill 10 people to do so I'd not, because my ideals about not killing anyone at all would prevent me. after all, who am I to say that one life is 'worth' 1e(-6)th of a life?
hmm, what do you think bout that?
no subject
Date: 2004-11-05 10:54 am (UTC)See, some people define "human" as soon as the egg is fertilised, but a lot of people disagree because there's a high chance of miscarriage during the few weeks after that. A lot of people define "human" as when the foetus develops into a recognisably human shape (around week 8 - don't take my word on it - argh, I'm supposed to know this for the bio exam >.<). And there's a bunch of people who define "human" as only when the child is being born...but they're about as extreme as the people who define egg as human, because children can be born from Caesarian at around...was it 2 months? before their expected time and still survive.
Anyway, stem cell takes the egg pretty much right after fertilisation, so for many people, this is not a human. Considering the abortion rate - and that people have been doing it months into pregnancy, instead of killing and throwing away the aborted zygotes (gaah I'm sure that's not the word for it >.< noooo gonna fail bio), why not abort them at the right time and use those for research?
I think that's pretty much the idea, but it was a long time ago when someone gave us a talk on stem cell research ^^; For a lot people it's not really "killing" because they don't consider a freshly fertilised egg a human.
But yeah...if they're going to be against abortion, I can see why they'd be against stem cell research, because they'll need to be using fertilised eggs from humans, and *shock horror gasp* that equates to murder. Though as I said before, the miscarriage rate during the time when the egg becomes a "stem cell" is very high.
PS: People who know better about this subject better correct me on misinformation =__=|||
no subject
Date: 2004-11-05 11:05 am (UTC)I'd argue that if the developing thing could be hurt, it's prolly at the stage where it could be murdered. though if stem cells aren't at that stage, I agree that it's strange to be against stem cell research. especially if it's as beneficial as you mention
I don't agree with them being against abortion :/
no subject
Date: 2004-11-05 11:24 am (UTC)The whole point of stem cells is that they are undifferentiated - so they have the potential to develop into anything. So stem cells are taken before any specific cells form: before any heart or nerves form.
According to my trusty bio prac book, 15% of zygotes fail to develop after fertilisation. That's a lot of (potential) stem cells.
Abortion's okay, up to a point. Shouldn't be encouraged, that's all ^^;
no subject
Date: 2004-11-05 01:53 pm (UTC)Chen.