See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

1. #301
   On July 24th, 2008 at 12:47 pm, governmentdrone said:

   zeroangel:

   One other thing I forgot to mention about that ballot issue allowing stem cell research. There was also a provision in it that allowed for open solicitation and payment at abortion clinics. Basically it’s set up so that representatives of the “research institutions” get free and unfettered access to abortion clinics, planned parenthood centers, and abortion alternative counseling centers to approach women and offer to pay for their abortions and give the abortion facility cash payments for the aborted fetuses, with the understanding that the facilities are expected to then split this payment with the women.

   This I find to be reprehensible and predatory behavior. And it makes me somewhat ashamed of the electorate in my state for not having the common sense to actually read what they were voting for.

2. #302
   On July 24th, 2008 at 1:05 pm, zeroangel said:

   governmentdrone:

   Glad to see you’re still checking this thread.

   Likewise . Actually, I have this page open in the background here at work and keep hitting refresh every couple of minutes looking for a new reply. Needless to say, I like these kind of discussions.

   I am not opposed to any kind of stem cell research on any moral grounds. Opposition doesn’t have to be based on religious issues and such secular opposition can still be based on the question of where human life begins. That is to say, there are atheists that are opposed to meddling with a fertilized egg simply on a “slippery slope” argument. I disagree with these folks, but they do make an interesting argument.

   I am also not opposed to research into cloning, but I do not think a “clone” should be allowed to develop into a fetus and certainly should not be born until they have completely worked out the issue of clones aging (short telomeres).

   Both stem cell research and research into cloning could provide some exciting advancements. I hope that in my lifetime human life expectancy is extended to previously unheard of levels. Perhaps, one day, we may even defeat aging and death (at least barring severe trauma). I realize some people might think that is blasphemous, I just hope those people recognize that if I want to live forever I should be allowed to, and they don’t have to *smile*.

   However, moral issues aside, I am also very wary about what public funds are spent on. I don’t think that we should take any kind of public funding out of research, but I think that it certainly shouldn’t be wasteful.

3. #303
   On July 24th, 2008 at 1:09 pm, zeroangel said:

   governmentdrone:

   approach women and offer to pay for their abortions and give the abortion facility cash payments for the aborted fetuses, with the understanding that the facilities are expected to then split this payment with the women.

   Yikes! As I am sure its apparent, I am against legislation forbidding abortion, but this IS disgusting. It’s in the same vein as selling organs or donating blood for money IMHO. One could imagine unscrupulous individuals getting pregnant and getting an abortion as an alternate source of income.

4. #304
   On July 24th, 2008 at 1:49 pm, zeroangel said:

   governmentdrone:

   Seems I opened pandora’s box:

   http://michellemalkin.com/2008/07/24/federal-government-site-refers-poor-moms-to-planned-parenthood/#comment-385346

5. #305
   On July 24th, 2008 at 1:51 pm, governmentdrone said:

   zeroangel:

   I hope that in my lifetime human life expectancy is extended to previously unheard of levels.

   My own religious belief (and in fact it’s one of the things that brought me back to my faith – I’d be happy to explain further, but don’t wish to “force” anything like that on you) tells me that the absolute longest that humans can live is 120 years. And I’m all for whatever can make that a practical reality.

   On the other hand, I’m a big fan of Robert Heinlein – particularly the stories about Lazarus Long and his “family”. I don’t know if you’re familiar with those books, but they’re based on the premise that the Long family started as a part of a genetic breeding “experiment” that was started in the late 1800′s (basically subsidising marriages between couples who came from long-lived families) with the goal of extending human life. The families were “found out” in the late 20th century and fled the planet to escape forced medical experimentation to discover their “secret”. The leaders of various nations were then forced to step up their own efforts to discover how to prolong life after the families fled – thus resulting in medical and technological advances that basically extended human life indefinitely.

   Of course with that came the problems of overpopulation, etc., and mankind was then forced to step up their efforts in space travel and exploration in order to find new habitible planets.

   Fascinating stuff.

   Yikes! As I am sure its apparent, I am against legislation forbidding abortion, but this IS disgusting.

   You said it.

   I’m also against any laws forbidding abortion, however, I wish there were some way to curtail the use of abortion as a tool of “convenience”. There are too many couples out there that would give anything to have a child that simply can’t – who wait for years and years to adopt. Meanwhile, women get abortions for reasons as simple as “I don’t want to be inconvenienced.”

   I know that there are issues involved with even a normal pregnancy that could impact a woman’s decision to give a baby up for adoption (emotional attachment that develops during the course of the pregnancy for example), but it still seems a shame to me that with so many couples waiting, there are lives that are literally thrown away.

   I’m not so naive – or over the edge – to think that there aren’t good and legitimate reasons for safe and legal abortions. Like I said, I just wish that there were less of them.

6. #306
   On July 24th, 2008 at 2:03 pm, governmentdrone said:

   zeroangel:

   Yep, you sure did open that box.

   I like a good debate as well as the next guy, but that’s one I really try to stay away from on this board. Be prepared to be called every name in the book over your stance.

   Abortion is such an emotional issue, it sometimes provokes people to say and do things they wouldn’t otherwise say or do.

   My father’s stance (which I disagree with) is that he’s a man, therefore he has no right to have an opinion on the issue of abortion. However, he’s also quick to point out that someone he knew in high school died because she had a “back room” abortion in the days before the procedure was legal.

   I’m not sure what the solution is, or if there is one. I guess my own stance is that abortions should be legally available, but that tax dollars should absolutely NOT be spent on them.

7. #307
   On July 24th, 2008 at 2:31 pm, zeroangel said:

   governmentdrone:

   tells me that the absolute longest that humans can live is 120 years.

   Why 120? I am curious. Why not 130? Why not 110?

   Seems we are on the same page with abortion as well. I don’t think it’s great, but I defer to the woman.

   Sorry if my response is short, I am sure you know I have my hands full now .

   I am prepared to be assaulted on all fronts. It happens alot to me on this board. It doesn’t really bother me. Some of the folks that are quick to attack me I don’t really take too seriously. Many of them seem to be irrational.

8. #308
   On July 24th, 2008 at 2:39 pm, zeroangel said:

   governmentdrone:

   Eeshh… not going back there (other thread).

   Too many pepole posting all at once and it’s taking up too much time from my job.

   Check out comment #142 from birdlady79, its rather good.

9. #309
   On July 24th, 2008 at 2:58 pm, governmentdrone said:

   zeroangel:

   OK. Since you asked for it:

   In the book of Genesis, people lived for extraordinary lengths of time. (Methusela for example lived for over 900 years. Life spans of 500, 600, 700 years and more were not uncommon.) This all came to an end sometime after the great flood. God was speaking to someone (don’t recall who it was right now, and I’m still relatively new in my rediscovered faith so I don’t have a lot of stuff memorized) and He basically told him that he had decided that man was living too long. He told this person that as far as mankind goes “The number of your days shall be 120 years.”

   At about that same time, there were stories in some of the scientific journals that said that after decades of exhaustive research, a consensus had been reached that if illness, disease, etc. could be taken out of the equation, and barring accidents, the human body could last . . .

   120 years.

   At that point I began to read the Bible more seriously. My faith was rekindled and my life has changed dramatically since.

   I believe in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob with all of my heart. I believe that Jesus Christ was his son and was sent as the redeemer of all mankind. You know, all the standard Christian stuff.

   More importantly, I know that God exists. I pray to Him on a regular basis, and He does answer prayers. Not always immediately, and not always with the answer I’d like, but he most definitely answers.

   For a long time in my life, I was without direction – just sort of getting by. No longer. I live my life for Him, and he has rewarded me beyond my wildest expectations. I met and married the love of my life, I’m blessed with 3 wonderful step-children, and my once disasterous financial situation has improved to the point that my wife and I just bought our first house. I give God all the credit for these things.

   I have worked in jobs all my life that were not fulfilling on any level. I’m close to being able to retire from the employer that I have worked for for almost 30 years. I have also held other jobs along the way. I am currently getting ready to enter the Rural Ministry Program for my church and within 6 years or so, I will be fully qualified for a ministry of my own. I have never been so excited about another job in my life, nor have I ever felt the sense of fulfillment I get when I think about what I will be doing soon.

   And there you have it. My testimony to you. Maybe more than you bargained for, and most probably more than you wanted when you asked “Why 120 years”. But I just felt compelled to tell you my story.

   Keep your head low on the abortion thread! Besides being a “bear” alaskangrizzly can be something of a neanderthal as well.

10. #310
    On July 24th, 2008 at 3:05 pm, governmentdrone said:

    Yep. Birdlady has some interesting points.

    I guess I may be something of an anomoly. Like I said, I think the procedure should be available. As for all the other stuff, my opinion is that the decision to have the abortion is something that the woman will have to (ultimately), reconcile with her creator.

11. #311
    On July 24th, 2008 at 4:06 pm, zeroangel said:

    Heya governmentdrone:

    I stopped responding over on the other thread. It’s a massive train wreck, I must say I am somewhat proud of myself. *smile*.

    Rational discussion is impossible. Replies to me range from condescending, sarcastic, and irrational to patronizing and immature.

    There is perhaps one commenter over there from the other side that is mature, unfortunately he/she seems to wax, wane, and dote on semantics so much as to be bordering on sophism.

    Thank you for satisfying my curiousity ref 120 yrs. I had thought that was what you were referring to, as I said, just curious.

    I am happy religion has fufilled you. Funny thing: for me its the other way around. I have found a whole new outlook on life since becoming an atheist. The idea that this is all I have and I should make the best of it has really changed my perspective (for the better) on life.

    Anyhow, unless you have something else you want to discuss I think here is a good place to close this thread. I look forward to seeing your comments in the future in other threads. Take care!

12. #312
    On July 25th, 2008 at 2:31 am, EWTHeckman said:

    zeroangel,

    I reread MikeOK’s comment in #4, actually turns out I don’t take it any further. His sentiments and mine are identical.

    I directly replied to Mike’s thoughts in #23. Your thoughts?

13. #313
    On July 25th, 2008 at 8:24 am, zeroangel said:

    EWTHeckman:

    Good thing I checked back here one last time.

    Well, firstly, we have to assume Sorokin is right. He may not be, and there may be other factors.

    I don’t see how SSM effects anything. There would still be monogamy.

    Or are you refering to sex before marriage or just gays/lesbians being bad for society in general? If thats the case, do you suggest the government pass/enforce laws against pre-marital sex and adultery?