Yale censors abortion art exhibit
From Fox News yesterday (click to enlarge):

Apr.23, 2008 12:59 pm |
Pop Culture |
From Fox News yesterday (click to enlarge):
Violations will be deleted and you may be banned.
Threats will be immediately reported to authorities.
Following these rules will make everyone's experience visiting JillStanek.com better.
Our volunteer moderators make prudent judgment calls to provide an open forum to discuss these issues. They reserve the right to remove any comment for any reason. Jill's decisions on such moderations are final.
Go to gravatar.com to create your avatar.
Honestly this is getting out of control. Even if she was telling the truth what’s done is done, all legally. What do you hope to achieve by continuing the story?
There have been two really interesting stories this week.
The Governor of Kansas vetoed some fairly harsh abortion legislation, and the Governor of Alaska gave birth to a child with Down syndrome knowing the child was afflicted.
I think both of those stories would be of more interest to the “life” crowd than whether or not some fruitloop at Yale is fingerpainting with her own revolting bodily fluids. (Heck, if her preferred medium was lymph it might have been more interesting…)
Perhaps I’m naive, but what happened to a code of ethics students must obey to attend college. It seems to me that things like cheating or lying would definitely be included and violations should result in disciplinary action. It’s obvious that either Yale is lying or Ms. Shvarts is lying to either the school or the public. It makes Yale look bad in any event. Not something rich alumni want to see, not parents trying to decide to which school they will pay to send little Johnny.
Dennis Prager is right on this point – almost every $$
spent on higher education today is an utter waste!
Politically correct garbage in – pc garbage out.
Jess/ Laura,
Why don’t you want continuing coverage on this story?
Don’t you want a member pro-choicer doing what she does best?
OR are you both disgusted (as we are) that her misguided line of reasoning is getting way out of control?
“There have been two really interesting stories this week. The Governor of Kansas vetoed some fairly harsh abortion legislation, and the Governor of Alaska gave birth to a child with Down syndrome knowing the child was afflicted.”
Laura, send a tip to Jill via the ‘contact’ link about these stories. There is really no ‘limit’ on things to talk about, but ymmv.
I just don’t think this is the most important thing we could be talking about. I want to hear more about the Governor of Alaska and her new baby.
“ymmv”
Huh?
Hey,
This is kind of off topic, but it does involve ethical behavior…
Does anybody know anything about IP addresses?
For instance, could someone in say, I don’t know, Santa Barbra, California, have the same IP address as someone in, Boise, Idaho or Minerva, Ohio?
What would be the odds?
Jess/ Laura,
Why don’t you want continuing coverage on this story?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Because it carries all the social importance and relevance of a toddler smearing his own turds on the wall.
Laura,
I watched the grandkids yesterday and I heard Charlotte screaming in the kitchen…apparently the dog had taken her dirty diaper right off of her and was playing a game of keep away!
No smearing…but pretty funny, just the same.
(by the way, I wasn’t neglecting her, I was busy changing a dirty diaper on her baby brother! Crappy day all around…ahhhh, I slay me.)
Laura,
..really? it’s that important?
Laura,
So now you are comparing aborted babies to turds on a wall. You continue to disgust.
This story has important relevance as it highlights abortion, the hypocrisy of pro-abort mentality, and the intrigue of an Ivy League School cover-up. Obviously this story was important enough for this insitution to lie and or accuse the student of lying in a public arena.
It’s interesting to see the reactions from you pro-aborts.
This story most definitely highlights the apathy felt for the unborn. Even if this girl wasn’t out to “kill” babies, the fact that she couldn’t care less if she did, says something.
It’s this callousness, like what was done to Bethanys’ Blessing that gets me. Such a cavalier attitude. No conscience tweak at all.
Scary.
So…lets react to an attention whore by… giving her attention?
Every time you post about her Jill, and every time one of you gets alllll riled up about it, you are giving this nutbar EXACTLY what she wants.
Its SO obvious its almost painful.
If everyone just rolled their eyes and walked away, she wouldn’t have any reason to continue this foolishness. But all you’re all doing is feeding in to it and encouraging it by giving her the exact reaction she wanted.
Hey, This is kind of off topic, but it does involve ethical behavior…
Does anybody know anything about IP addresses?
For instance, could someone in say, I don’t know, Santa Barbra, California, have the same IP address as someone in, Boise, Idaho or Minerva, Ohio?
What would be the odds?
Marykay, It doesn’t seem like it could. I think that most of the time, if two IP addresses are the same, it’s usually the same computer, unless they are in the same city of the same state, then they could be possibly sharing an ISP.
Jess:Honestly this is getting out of control.
It’s too late, I think the train left the tracks a long time ago.
– – – – – – – – – – – – –
Even if she was telling the truth what’s done is done, all legally. What do you hope to achieve by continuing the story?
Why does it matter to you if the discussion continues? Maybe the supporters of Yale want to figure out what is going on there. Do you have anything to lose?
MK,
My momma had a similar experience with my daughter yesterday too while I was at school!! lol..dogs and kiddies are crazy!
Oh..and p.s..If anyone is going to the Aurora PP rally on Saturday, let me know, cause I will be there!
@MK:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_address
@MK: I think this might help you more:
“The IP address acts as a locator for one IP device to find another and interact with it. It is not intended, however, to act as an identifier that always uniquely identifies a particular device. In current practice, an IP address is not always a unique identifier, due to technologies such as dynamic assignment and network address translation.”
Amanda,
Well there is that, but remember, we are also showing the pro choice side in a bad light. I guess you take your hits if you want to throw a few yourself. We’re willing to give her attention, if that attention points how how extreme the pro choice side is. If killing babies for art is horrible, then why isn’t killing them for any reason?
If you think what she is doing is awful, then why don’t you think what any woman having an abortion is awful?
You see? We’re hoping it helps people put two and two together.
It’s either wrong or it isn’t. If this art project is wrong, then why is it wrong? If abortion is not wrong, then why is this art project wrong?
Marykay, It doesn’t seem like it could. I think that most of the time, if two IP addresses are the same, it’s usually the same computer, unless they are in the same city of the same state, then they could be possibly sharing an ISP.
So YOU think they would be the same, what, location OR computer?
Rae,
The IP address acts as a locator for one IP device to find another and interact with it. It is not intended, however, to act as an identifier that always uniquely identifies a particular device. In current practice, an IP address is not always a unique identifier, due to technologies such as dynamic assignment and network address translation.”
Okay, but if one computer is interacting with the other, 2,000 miles apart, how does that work? Does the guy in Santa Barbra know the guy in Ohio?
Rae,
dynamic assignment and network address translation.”
Whassat?
Elizabeth,
We should have saved the diapers and done an art exhibit! We could have the dogs stuffed while we’re at it!
Ya know Amanda, there is a big part of me that agrees with you. This is all about attention, and if it’s positive or negative attention, it really doesn’t matter. No attention paid or apathy would probably work well.
It’s kind of like streaking at a sports game. You approach the barrier that you’re about to hop wearing nothing but an overcoat and you think to yourself how you know that this is risky cause you’re gonna get chased, and probably caught, but there’s a chance that you won’t get caught. Either way, teh audience will have a grand ol laugh as you run around the field, avoiding the security that is chasing you. But what if you hop the barrier, drop the overcoat start running around the field, and no one laughs or boos. No one begins to chase you. Instead you just stand there naked while everyone waits for halftime to be over. THAT would be the worst case scenario, not getting caught, because you’re almost sure you’re gonna get caught.
That is kinda how I see this situation here. If people think she’s a great innovative artist or if people think she’s a sick bastard, she wins either way. But if we ignore her, it’s just embarrassing for her.
On the other hand, I do see why it’s important to speak out against this. If no one did speak out against this, it would seem to show not empathy for this girl and her “work”, but for the unborn. I’m sure you’ve heard about this “artist” who has starved a dog on display and let it dies, and that’s his art project. It needs to be said that that isn’t right. You don’t kill dogs for no reason. Same with the unborn.
So I’m torn as to what to think, I suppose…
You don’t kill dogs for no reason.
Dang Elizabeth…Bobby says we can’t have the dogs stuffed!
Psh, WHATEVER, Bobby.
Hellooooo, it’s “art.”
MK,
there are some programs out there (whosIP) that you can run to identify the location of an IP (not exact) maybe down the city…
“If no one did speak out against this, it would seem to show not empathy for this girl and her “work”, but for the unborn.”
Oops! That should read “…to show not apathy for this girl…” as opposed to “empathy.” That changes the meaning, doesn’t it?
They both look preserved, MK.
mk, I know quite a bit about tracking IP addresses from a previous project. If you would like to email me, I can give you a great deal of information about it.
Jasper,
Well what if we do that and it says that they are coming from somewhere like Virginia, but we know that the person using it lives in California?
MK –
Ya know that’s a good question about the IP address’.
When my sister n law was going through (still is!) a horrible divorce she was trying to find out if the no good SOB was cheating on her. Come to find out it is a bit difficult with IP address, at least for him. He traveled alot – same job as my hubby – and since he was using a lap top the IP address would change depending on where he was – or something like that. The funny thing was we were able to bust him because he said he was at O’hare but the IP address showed him at LAX – big difference don’t ya think?
From that whole experience, I do know that company’s like AOL have a “range” of numbers and I think those ranges are what tell you where they come from. I would think that those ranges would be area specific – but I’m not sure. Then the whole laptop thing comes in and this is where i get confused.
Do you want me to ask Da Hubby AKA computer geek that makes Bill Gates look Suave?
Lol you guys are silly.
By the way, does anybody have some objective research they could point me towards about how adult stem cell research is more effective than embryonic? I’m doing my persuasive speech on it and the outline is due friday!! Any help would be MUCH appreciated!
Thank you Elizabeth. I will. In about 45 minutes. I have to pick the kids up from school…
“..Okay, but if one computer is interacting with the other, 2,000 miles apart, how does that work? Does the guy in Santa Barbra know the guy in Ohio?”
—————————————
I’m in IT but NOT into networking..but the IP addresses that we work with basically works like a telephone #….the first few numbers would act like an area code and the last few would point to the specific computer/ server.
The dynamic assignment/ network address transalation would only work on the last few numbers but not on the first few numbers.
Val,
That would be awesome!
RSD,
All of the numbers are the same…and oddly enough every once in awhile a different IP shows up, but IT IS THE SAME as the IP that shows up differently on the first guys…does that make sense?
Like this:
Guy A: 000.00.00.000
AND 000.00.00.001
AND 000.00.00.002
Guy B: 000.00.00.000
AND 000.00.00.001
AND 000.00.00.004
It really gets interesting because there is a guy 3 and his are:
Guy C: 000.00.00.000
AND 000.00.00.002
AND 000.00.00.004
This is a little off subject, however, since they were talking about bears on the other thread I thought I’d asked via the great wealth of knowlegde on this site.
I am helping my 12 year old trying to decide on a term paper subject. He has to write a story about a unique animal.
He picked Clydsedale horses and Elk.
Does anyone know much about Clydesdales and/or Elk and where I may be able to go to get more info on them? Perhaps someone who lives in Alaska (for elk). How did Clydesales get so big, what country of origin are they from, etc.
Thanks.
“If you think what she is doing is awful, then why don’t you think what any woman having an abortion is awful?
It’s either wrong or it isn’t. If this art project is wrong, then why is it wrong? If abortion is not wrong, then why is this art project wrong?”
-MK
MK –
Because I think there is a HUUUUUUGE distinction between an accidental pregnancy where the woman is not prepared for whatever reason to be a mother or a wanted pregnancy where the fetus turns out to have an anomaly of some kind VS. a woman repeatedly getting pregnant on purpose and aborting over and over again for attention.
For the vast majority of women, even those who have no regrets about aborting, its still not something they took lightly or trivially, as this girl clearly does.
That being said, what she did (if she did it, which I SERIOUSLY doubt she actually did) is perfectly legal, so no amount of attention paid to it will bring about any legal consequences to her – it will only feed in to her desire for attention.
Starving a dog, on the other hand, is against the law, and bringing attention to that would result in an intervention and legal consequences. In this case – the only consequence that could befall this girl are the kinds of things she seems to be just ASKING for: lots and lots of negative attention, getting people riled up, and bringing up a censorship issue with the school and press.
Now you know perfectly well given all this attention, that some art gallery will pick up her exhibit, pay her, and people will flock to it out of sheer curiousity, even if its disgusted curiousity.
So not only does she get the attention she wants by creating controversy, she’s going to end up winning in the end regardless now.
I just think when its so clear something like this is just a sicko who needs people to look at her, its better just to ignore it. I feel like now that she got this reaction, she’s going to be sitting around trying to think of what else she can do get this reaction again…
MK,
I guess that’s where your dynamic addressing would work…the system re-assigns the last numbers depending on the load on the system..if it finds a “free”/ unallocated address it re-assigns it and releases the address when done…and so on and so forth…
HisMan: I am helping my 12 year old trying to decide on a term paper subject. He has to write a story about a unique animal.
Take him to the public library and let him do his own research, he’ll be thankful when he’s older. OK, Now you can tell me to MMOB:)
Amanda,
When you say “accidental” pregnancy, do you mean unplanned?
Janet:
At this point I’m just trying to help him make a decision, then we’ll do the research thing. I was just wondering if I could get a quick purview of Clydesdales.
Janet:
At this point I’m just trying to help him make a decision, then we’ll do the research thing. I was just wondering if I could get a quick purview of Clydesdales and Elk.
RSD,
But if it assigns the last numbers, why are the first ones the same too? And why over and over? And why so many miles apart? Wouldn’t the server be closer to home? Why would Santa Barbra link to Virginia?
Amanda,
But that’s what I don’t get. You think it is okay under “certain” circumstances, but not others. Why?
If it is a person/human/life/baby then wouldn’t it be wrong under ALL circumstances, and if it isn’t a person/human/life/baby wouldn’t it be okay in ALL circumstances?
What in your mind makes it “wrong” to do this for art? What is “wrong” about it? Do you see what I’m asking?
Carla –
no, but only because there’s a distinction between using birth control and having it fail somehow (an accident), and just not using birth control at all and getting pregnant (unplanned, but not an accident).
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4258794138972547179
Hisman,
It’s not informative, but it is sweet and shows the love of a father and son…even if they are horses.
Not all of my children were planned but not one is an “accident.” :)
Interesting thoughts though, Amanda.
this is a short lesson on Clydesdales…the bare bones.
http://horses.about.com/od/breed1/p/clydesdale.htm
Hisman,
Personally, I find meerkats and prairie dogs fascinating.
As well as stingrays. Did you know that they have “teeth” in their skin and are really social?
Prairie Dogs have a complex language all their own.
Oh,
and of course.
Lemmings.
and
Mullets…we still don’t know why they “jump” out of the water and slam their bodies!
MK:
The teeth in a prairie dog’s skin must be an evolutionary thing/leftover before they evolved from sabre tooth tigers or thorny blowfish, eh?,
I was out at a construction site in the middle of the desrt last week and a prarie dog was trapped with one of the those sticky type rat traps.
I was able to free him and managed not to get bitten, however, to me, all life is precious and it was worth the risk. What is amazing to me is how this animal fought that trap to exhasution. This is life. If we only knew what babies in the womb thought and could relay that to teh world….we would end abortion overnight.
MK,
Is someone stalking you…is that why you’re looking up IP addresses? Do we need to crack some skulls lol?
Like this:
Guy A: 000.00.00.000
AND 000.00.00.001
AND 000.00.00.002
Guy B: 000.00.00.000
AND 000.00.00.001
AND 000.00.00.004
It really gets interesting because there is a guy 3 and his are:
Guy C: 000.00.00.000
AND 000.00.00.002
AND 000.00.00.004
Posted by: mk at April 23, 2008 2:54 PM
Huh. I’m not IT, but this is what I think.
1. One household with three different computers, and either three different posters (all from the same household), or one person posting from all three computers.
2. This person(s) network service is a single service but has more than one server location, and depending on traffic, hosts through different locations (Santa Barbara/Virginia).
Maybe?
After having read Amanda and Bobby’s posts I’m inclined to agree with Bobby. However, for me there is also the issue of this “project” being “encouraged” and indeed fully supported within what is suppose to be an institution of higher learning.
It seems that art at this level of study only has meaning if it considerably stretches the boundaries of decency and shock. It really adds nothing to man himself, does not cause him to try to understand beauty or creation or even to understand what it means to be human. In fact it does the opposite, it shrinks both the “artist” and those viewing this garbage. This woman is completely depraved and she has debased herself. Shvarts represents an educational system that carries the same values because she is a product of that system. There is no higher thinking involved in this “work”, no critical thinking.
Truly I feel sorry for this young woman – she’s completely steeped in the culture of death.
Elizabeth,
Lol…no I’m not being stalked. But I have come across something that is upsetting and I am trying to track it down. The only clues I have are IP addresses. And it’s all greek to me…
What’s throwing me is that the culprits are spread out all over the map and the main IP is the only connection. Which means, I think, that that person would have to travel alot?
Elizabeth,
Do we need to crack some skulls lol?
No, but, Nancy, Bess, George and Ned ARE trying to “crack” this case!
Problem is we have lots of circumstantial evidence, but as of yet, no “smokin’!” gun!
hey, where’s Nancy Drew when you need her?
mk you dated yourself and moi!!
Now Patricia, they have NEW Nancy Drew books out. Apparently it doesn’t matter if Carolyn Keene is dead!
I realize I’ve highjacked another thread, but honestly, this is related…
Heir,
Yes, that is what I thought too. But now we know that these people actually LIVE in different places. So unless there is a heck of a lot of traveling going on, I don’t see how this can be.
And I don’t know ANYONE that travels that much…I mean we’re talkin’ Georgia, California, Ohio, West Virginia…sheesh!
What about broadband cards that are issued by cellular services like Verizon? I wonder if that would explain it.
Did you know that Carolyn Keene is a ghost writer and that she wrote many series including also the Hardy Boys?
I always wanted Ned and Nancy to marry……, but then I was 10 when I read these books!!!
Also mk
a computer can have 2 ip addresses – one which is the actual or real ip address of your computer, the other may be the ip address of the router- I think this is the ip address you are seeing on the internet from your computer.
Others cannot see your real ip address if you are using a router.
that’s my 2 cents on the ip thingy
They both look preserved, MK.
lol, and not very well at that! The dog looks vicious, no?
Heir,
What would a broadband card do? I feel so inept!
Heir,
Also, these people have AOL accounts. Could they still be using Verizon? Could these be text messages on a phone? And can you download things on a phone?
Patricia,
I’d forgotten that Carolyn Keene was a fake name.
Do we know her/his real name?
There are also Nancy Drew PC games out now. I’ve played every one of them (I think theres at least 15) with my daughter. They’re awesome. They make me feel like a little kid again! A new one should be coming out in a month or two. I just love ’em.
I’m not sure MK! I was just thinking that since the broadband cards are issued by national services, it might explain the IP’s coming from various parts of the country, but also being so similar.
The broadband cards get plugged into the ports in the side of a laptop, and give you wireless internet access from anywhere that Verizon (or whatever other service) has available service.
Heir,
Ahhhh…but that’s the thing, they aren’t similar. They’re identical. Does that make a difference.
Uhhhhhh….at this point, I have to admit my total and complete ignorance of the whole matter.
I wonder if Jill could call the service that hosts her site and get some advice?
Heir,
Thanks. Actually, you were a big help. I never knew about the broad band thingy.
I already know that one of the suspects is guilty. Just trying to see if the others are connected…
I’ve spoken to AOL and the Geek Squad…
Hmmmmm…WWND…what would Nancy do???
Guy A: 000.00.00.000
AND 000.00.00.001
AND 000.00.00.002
Guy B: 000.00.00.000
AND 000.00.00.001
AND 000.00.00.004
It really gets interesting because there is a guy 3 and his are:
Guy C: 000.00.00.000
AND 000.00.00.002
AND 000.00.00.004
Posted by: mk at April 23, 2008 2:54 PM
So Guy A, B, and C are working from the same IP location 000.00.00.000 (that is their router IP you are seeing)
but they also are posting from 3 other locations with the routers ip’s ending in 1, 2 and 4 (so to speak)
???
maybe Guy A, B and C are one person…??
the external IP address you are seeing is the broadband modem
You already tried a “whois” search didn’t you? I did that once to track down a porn spammer, and then I spammed their sysadmin back with pictures of puppies and kittens. He got so pissed at me that he threatened to share my email with every spammer on the planet if I didn’t stop. On the other hand, I stopped getting porn spam….
what kind of human being can get pissed about pictures of kittens????
=)
Patricia,
No, we know for a fact that they are 3 separate people.
So lets say that guy one, call him Don, has an IP address in Virginia through AOL, but lives in Ohio.
And guy two, let’s call him Alex, has the same IP through AOL but lives in West Virginia,
and the third guy, let’s call him Fester, has the same IP through AOL but lives in Santa Barbra,
These guys might not know each other, because the IP is just AOL’s and not their personal one?
MK
I don’t think its wrong to get an abortion. I think its wrong to get pregnant JUST to have an abortion.
As I’ve said, I do believe a fetus is a human, and my reasons for supporting the legality of abortion have to do with the fact that I can’t reconcile the idea of FORCING someone to do something with their body they don’t want to do.
So that’s not to say I don’t think its a shame when someone doesn’t take the life they’ve created seriously.
Heir,
I like the way you think…
We have narrowed one down (in between our convo here) to a static IP. Still working on the other two.
Here are some pictures…
no one stalk me please!!
http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2009810&l=278db&id=195101317
Amanda,
Just to clarify. You recognize the unborn as a person with equal rights to the mother, except for the right to bodily autonomy? Am I saying that right?
The fetus is a baby, like any other, but it happens to be in the wrong place?
Amanda,
No way! Are those monkeys just roamin’ free? That is SOOOOOOO cool!
mk,
try this link…TOTALLY accurate for my IP!
http://www.geobytes.com/IpLocator.htm?GetLocation
MK –
Basically, yeah.
For the same reason I don’t think the government can force me to give my kidney to someone, even if they’ll die without it. It’s a gift, not an obligation – to donate a part of your body to GIVE life to someone else. In a perfect world, everyone would want to give that gift, but its not a perfect world sadly… and I just think providing encouragement and resources to guide a person to decide to give that gift makes a lot more sense then legally forcing them to.
And yes, the apes are tame and just mingle around with people. One of the baby ones jumped on my arm actually – I don’t have the picture up yet. They were one of the best parts of the trip.
Amanda,
But a kidney is not a living thing. You don’t need to kill a kidney to ensure a persons rights. I agree that no one should have to give a non living part of their body to another person against their will, but why is the mother’s right more important than the baby’s right?
We’re not talking about a non living organ that doesn’t have any rights, we are talking about a seperate person that SHOULD have equal rights, at least as far as the right to life goes…
Don’t you see a difference between a non living organ and a human being?
Amanda,
I want a baby monkey to jump into MY arms….waaaaaah!!!!
mk,
in addition to 7:27 post, when I put mine in that link, my EXACT city comes up. When I put it in “whois”, my internet provider’s city comes up (a totally different state, too!)
the IP addresses that you posted all go to one city/state using the link.
On “whois”, they also list the abuse e-mail addresses for further action if necessary????
If this person, or these people is/are stalking you or something, I hope they are not stupid enough to use a company computer! LOL!
Also, here’s a good link to understand the basics. Pay special attention to this:
Classed IP Addressing and the Use of ARP
and here’s a bit from the next part down (there’s a picture on the site for better understanding!):
Where the metric value is the number of hops to the destination. In this case,
route add 200.1.3.3 200.1.2.3 1
will tell A to use C as the gateway to reach E. Similarly, for E to reach A,
route add 200.1.2.1 200.1.3.10 1
will be used to tell E to use C as the gateway to reach A. It is necessary that C have two IP addresses – one for each network interface. This way, A knows from C’s IP address that it is on its own network, and similarly for E. Within C, the routing module will know from the network number of each interface which one to use for forwarding IP packets.
The Netmask
When setting up each node with its IP address, the Netmask ask must also be specified. This mask is used to specify which part of the address is the network number part, and which is the host part. This is accomplished by a logical bitwise-AND between the Netmask ask and the IP address. The result specifies the network number. For Class C, the Netmask ask will always be 255.255.255.0; for Class B, the Netmask ask will always be 255.255.0.0; and so on. When A sent a packet to E in the last example, A knew that E wasn’t on its network segment by comparing A’s network number 200.1.2 to the value resulting from the bitwise-AND between the Netmask ask 255.255.255.0 and the IP address of E, 200.1.3.2, which is 200.1.3.
anyhoo…here’s that link! (I wish I could send some aspirin over the net as well!!!)
http://www.sangoma.com/support/tutorials/tcp_ip.html
Good luck!
True that the kidney is not a living thing, but the person who would die without it certainly is.
My sincerest hope is that we can figure out how to transplant wombs someday. If that could be done, I would immediately support the banning of abortion except for cases of fatal fetal anomalies – because I have no doubt there would be PLENTY of women who really want to be pregnant and give birth rather than adopt…
Anon,
Thank you. That was really good to know that you can get different results from different “whois” sites.
I sort of get this, but it gets awfully complicated. I have a real hard time with numbers. That side of my brain never switched on. So this is really difficult. I will look at that site, but I’m not holding out much hope for myself. I might surprise me tho!
Right now it looks like one of the IPs is static, and the other is unretrievable. Still workin’ on the third one. (I’ve been getting a little help, I’m not even sure what I just said, lol)
And yeah, I’ll take that aspirin now…!
@Amanda: I know that sounds like a good idea, but I think it’s pretty unrealistic. Technically there is an immunological suppression in women who *are* pregnant because a fetus does not necessarily have the same MHC as the mother. So in order to prevent an immune response against the fetus (which sometimes fails in the case of that Rh-factor disorder).
In fact, they haven’t entirely learned *how* the immune system is suppressed and prevented from attacking the fetus.
Plus there is the complication of all the blood vessels that supply the uterus with blood as well as all the delicate vessels in the placenta.
Amanda 7:55:
You have to be joking about the idea of women having womb transplants. Think about it for a minute. Why don’t we just let monkeys incubate our children for us? Then none of us would be inconvenienced.
True that the kidney is not a living thing, but the person who would die without it certainly is.
But Amanda,
that’s not a fair comparison.
You’re comparing an organ with a human life.
In one scenario there are two human lives being weighted. The mothers and the babies. They have equal rights. Rights to life.
In the second scenario you are comparing a non-living organ to a human being. The person and the organ do NOT have equal rights.
Demanding a body part from someone is not the same as taking someones life.
It’s like a misdirection. It sounds right, but on closer inspection they aren’t equal scenarios.
We’re not talking about someone giving up a part of their body. We’re talking about 2 equal beings, having a right to live.
In one scenario, you are actually causing the death which is not the same as the second scenario where you would not be causing,/i> the persons death. The death is going to happen through no fault of yours. You didn’t cause the illness that required a transplant.
But you ARE causing the “illness” that will take the babies life. Can you see that?
“Why don’t we just let monkeys incubate our children for us? Then none of us would be inconvenienced.”
@Janet: Do you remember that old show, “Picket Fences” with Tom Skerrit (I think that’s his name…)? There was an episode of that episode where the main character had to deal with these kooks who impregnated a cow with a human embryo and eventually that cow gave birth to the human baby. Trippy. It was originally going to be an X-Files/Picket Fences crossover…but CBS backed out.
MK
I’m not comparing the organ to the baby, im comparing the person who NEEDS the organ to the baby, just as the baby NEEDS the organs of the mother to live.
Rae – I know its about as possible as time travel, just nice to think of a solution where everyone ends up happy.
Janet – Uhh…Okay? Me saying a mother who can’t get pregnant could “adopt” a fetus rather than needing to wait for it to be born is the same as saying monkeys should have our children? LOL. Did you just want to use the word “monkey” in a sentence or something??
@Amanda: Teeeeeeechnically, time travel is possible. It’s a weird physics thing, but apparently it is possible. Go figure.
You have to be joking about the idea of women having womb transplants. Think about it for a minute. Why don’t we just let monkeys incubate our children for us? Then none of us would be inconvenienced.
The killer is that we would rather go to this extreme that just learn to master our sexual impulses and use them responsibly, accepting the consequences of our actions like adults.
We are so desperate for the ability to have sex with no consequences that we are actually having a conversation about artificial wombs…
It’s crazy talk.
Why is sex so important? So important that we kill our children, fill ourselves with hormones, contract diseases, degrade ourselves by becoming objects instead of people…it’s just sex, for goodness sake. Perspective, people, perspective.
Amanda,
I’m not comparing the organ to the baby, im comparing the person who NEEDS the organ to the baby, just as the baby NEEDS the organs of the mother to live.
I understand that’s what you think you are doing…I’m just pointing out that it’s faulty logic.
Again, you are causing the “illness” that will end the babies life.
You are NOT causing the illness that requires and organ transplant.
One had nothing to do with you and the other has everything to do with you.
You are not responsible for the person that needs the organ as A. You did not cause the original illness, and B. There is no reason for you to give someone your organ.
You are responsible for the baby because A. you did cause the necessity for it to require your womb and B. There is a reason for you to keep them alive.
One is contingent upon you and you alone. The other is not.
Also, I say it is misdirection because both items are in your body. The baby and the organ. One is a person, one is not. We are talking about giving up an item in your body. You and the organ do not have equal rights. You and the baby do.
Giving up the organ does not result in the organs death. Giving up the baby does result in the babies death.
Nobody can force you to remove your organ, Nobody can force you to remove your baby. This is your scenario. You’re right. Nobody can force you to give your organ to someone else. Just as no one can force you to have an abortion. No one can force you to remove something from your body.
You can voluntarily give up your organ because it is a non living thing and has no rights. You cannot voluntarily give up your baby because it IS a human being and does have rights.
You see? Misdirection. Focusing on giving up your organ takes your eyes off of the real situation.
mk,
If the computer is part of a network, the static is the server.
Anon,
My understanding is that if the IP is a static one then it “belongs” to the owner of the computer and the owner can be ID’d. But if it is roaming then all you are getting is the ID of the server…right?
what kind of human being can get pissed about pictures of kittens????
=)
Posted by: Amanda at April 23, 2008 6:53 PM
The kind of human being who receives over 100 pictures of kittens in an hour…. ;-)
In my defense, I sent them a polite email first asking them to take my email address off their distribution list, but they never responded.
Amanda, I think we have a problem of different perspectives here, me pro-life, you pro-choice. – I thought you were using the example of a (full) womb transplant with the intent to make abortion more rare by having a pregnant mother transplant her womb into a non-pregnant mother. You said womb transplant (I imagined a uterus transplant), and you meant a fetal transplant, right? Can you see why it sounded crazy – Hardly anything surprises me here anymore, but that did.
But, I take it that you meant that abortion would become more rare if all pregnant ladies could give their fetuses to a mother wanting a baby, so she didn’t have to adopt.
Just having the baby is so much easier. The amount of gestation time between what you are suggesting and what is typical in an adoption case is so small, it seems ridiculous to even argue against the adoption option. Yikes. The monkey idea sounded good at the time. I was being facetious. I get annoyed that women can’t be bothered for nine months to carry a baby. Yikes again.
The suspense is killing me, mk. Who are we suspecting here?
mk,
In your scenario, Guy a, b & c all have 000.00.00.000 in common. Is that the static?
The “server” has a static IP address and subnet mask for each domain controller. If a computer has more than one network adapter, you must assign a separate IP address for each adapter.
Why is sex so important? So important that we kill our children, fill ourselves with hormones, contract diseases, degrade ourselves by becoming objects instead of people…it’s just sex, for goodness sake. Perspective, people, perspective.
Posted by: mk at April 23, 2008 8:22 PM
Because the mass media controls everything we think and see in this country. I think it all started with “Laugh-In” in 1970. Lol. That was kind-of risque for it’s time, remember? Most of you don’t remember it, I’m sure! I wasn’t allowed to watch it when it first came out. Our culture has gone downhill ever since. Remember Ruth Buzzy and Arte Johnson?
@Janet: Viva la “M*A*S*H”.
Ok, good, I wasn’t able to post earlier, IE said there was a page error. Anyways…Just on a side note of similiar interest, these are a couple of communities on Livejournal with where women post art they’ve made with their menstrual blood referred to as moonblood art by some:
Art by Women About Menstruation
http://community.livejournal.com/blood_art
RQ_MoonBlood
http://community.livejournal.com/rq_moonblood/
Hmm, I’m unable to post comments with links, says it can’t find a header????
Just on a side note of similiar interest, these are a couple of communities on Livejournal with where women post art they’ve made with their menstrual blood referred to as moonblood art by some:
Art by Women About Menstruation
RQ_MoonBlood
test
“try this link…TOTALLY accurate for my IP!
http://www.geobytes.com/IpLocator.htm?GetLocation“
Anon, yes thats works good, better than “whoiIP” MK…
Rachel,
I’ll approve your links and they’ll show up. I think if you post more than 1 it has to be approved.
The argument that an artificial womb should eliminate most abortion is essentially the same as saying that a human life is worth less than nine months of inconvenience.
I know John, that is completely ridiculous.
HisMan: I used to ride Clydesdales (actual half-sisters to some of the famous Budweiser stock). They are magnificent animals. If your son needs a fun fact, Clydesdales happen to be among the “thinnest” of the draft breeds, making them a little more comfortable for a rider. They have a very comfortable stride. I believe they’re a Scottish breed. Let me dig around, I used to be in a horse club with people who personally owned draft horses like Clydesdales.
@Janet: Viva la “M*A*S*H”.
Posted by: Rae at April 23, 2008 9:08 PM
Did you like the movie or TV show better? I saw the TV Show first, so that was my fav. We watched re-runs for years!
@Janet: The TV show is *far* superior to the movie, in my opinion. I love how punny (hahahahahhaha) the TV show is.
I have such a crush on BJ and Hawkeye. Lol. :) I watch re-runs all the time, and that show ended a looooong time before I was born. :-p
Thanks so much Lyssie!
Jasper:
Send me an e-mail on how I can dress up my posts please.
Italics, links, photos, etc.
Carder,
We are waiting for them to show up…then we’ll let you know…
Me too, Jasper. I’d like a tutorial, too.
RSD: I guess that’s where your dynamic addressing would work…the system re-assigns the last numbers depending on the load on the system..if it finds a “free”/ unallocated address it re-assigns it and releases the address when done…and so on and so forth…
That’s exactly right. For example, at my company office there is a “pool” of IP addresses. If there are 4 computers online, then the next one will get the 5th number.
If the 5th user signs off, and another user goes on, it will get that same 5th number. As long as the first 4 are still on, an unlimited number of users can have the 5th number, sequentially.
I’ve run into that with American Online. There is a “family” if IP addresses, and they are shared among the users. I’ve downloaded some stuff from various sites, and once in a while I’ll get a notice like, “Your IP address has downloaded 827,499,450 megabytes….” The system is recognizing many users with the same address.
It’s come up before:
Esther,
Was that anonymous you and not Doug? If so, sorry, but you are posting with the same IP address. How do you know Doug?
Posted by: mk at October 27, 2007 5:22 AM
How is it possible that Doug and I have the same IP address? I only know him from his postings.
Posted by: Esther at October 27, 2007 5:40 AM
https://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2007/10/proliferations_7.html
Doug, can you stay online for about 20-30 min?
But if it assigns the last numbers, why are the first ones the same too? And why over and over? And why so many miles apart? Wouldn’t the server be closer to home? Why would Santa Barbra link to Virginia?
MK, if one logs on to a local area network, like that of a university, it’s often possible to go from there to other sites with the university’s server acting as a “proxy server” for the user, who can be anywhere in the world, the IP address then showing up as the university’s.
Most schools block this, because spammers, etc., could then use it to send stuff out.
There are free anonymous proxy servers that act as an intermediary between the user’s computer and the rest of the internet. Websites are thus accessed indirectly, rather than directly, the website seeing the proxy’s IP address, rather than the user’s.
There are risks with it, though – the proxy can “see” what the user is doing, so it’s not advisable to send sensitive or financial information over proxy servers.
There are also pay-to-use proxy servers which are better as far as risk.
Teeeeeeechnically, time travel is possible. It’s a weird physics thing, but apparently it is possible.
Rae, travel “forward” in time, right, but I don’t think travel can be “backwards.”
It has to do with relativity, that as the speed of light is approached, time tends toward zero and mass tends toward infinity.
The “travel” is a relative thing – person A zooms around near lightspeed, and for them time appears to pass normally, though if they return to base, where person B has been just sitting, B will have aged a lot relative to A.
A has thus “traveled” forward in time from B’s persepctive.
Doug,
You still there? We need to talk.
Doug, can you stay online for about 20-30 min?
:: laughing ::
Yes, you rascal, though my ears are ringing from all the pinging on my yellow submarine.
Are you still on the phone, marykay?
@Doug: No, that’s not what I’m talking about. There is something else, I can’t remember who told me (I think it was my friend Reece), but there is a really large particle accelerator being built somewhere (Chicago-area maybe?) that will be so fast, it can send particles into the past or future. We don’t know where they’re going but apparently they do time travel.
How it works, I’m not sure, as I said, I’m no physicist (in fact, I hate physics) but I could ask around about it.
Bethany,
My husband is…I’ll call as soon as I can!
Doug, Don’t go anywhere.
Oh it figures, Marykay! LOL
Doug, just out of curiosity, do you know anyone named “Alex Bruce”, “Mary Scott”, “Glenda Parker”, or someone named “Festus”?
*Ping* *Ping*, knocking on your submarine– you there? :-)
http://www.findnot.com/

Here’s a cool place that shows you your ip address, mine is 65.242… though for me it got the city and state wrong, since the network is located away from where I am.
Bethany, no to those names, although there is the immortal Festus Hagen of ‘Gunsmoke’ fame.
there is a really large particle accelerator being built somewhere (Chicago-area maybe?) that will be so fast, it can send particles into the past or future. We don’t know where they’re going but apparently they do time travel.
Rae, I was talking with some family members a couple weeks ago, and they were saying that some big accelerator project got canceled – they were all bummed out about it. Don’t know if it was near Chicago or not.
I thought that “time travel” into the past was theoretically impossible, since that those points in spacetime have already been. I’m not up on the current cutting-edge physics, to say the least, but again, the “going into the future” can occur because of relativity, i.e. if you go fast enough then return to earth, you’d see that much more time had passed here than what you’d experienced.
One good little explanation for relativity is a ball on a train, bouncing up and down. If you’re on the train with the ball, you see it going up and down 3 feet each way, in this example.
If I’m standing on the ground by the train tracks, I see that same vertical motion, but the train is going by me, so I also see a horizontal component to the ball’s motion, and greater perceived distance, overall.
The ball is just doing what it’s doing, but the position and velocity of the observer makes a difference.
MK- Carolyn Keene was actually a staff of writers through the years.
Check out another writer’s blog – he has a great post today about personhood and abortion!
http://johncwright.livejournal.com/163772.html
hmmmm…FermiLabs in Batavia (right next to Aurora) already has a particle accelerator…now, why would somebody want another one?
Doug, would you be willing to send me an email?
My email is in the sidebar. I want to ask a couple of questions, but not in a public forum.
Why sure, Bethany.
The pot at the end of the rainbow.
Okay got the email and replied. Funny picture lol
Milehimama, 10:02, AWESOME post, I’m bookmarking it!
Carder, Hisman,
I sent you guys an email.
Doug, did you get my email?
Hey Doug,
Whatteryadoin? gettin’ a fake passport together???
Busy making calls pursuant to a meeting we’re going to have about the new processing rig we’re building, setting a guy up to take his driver’s test next week, trying to find out if I go to VA on Sunday for a job Monday, trying to find out if I go to a local job tomorrow or Saturday, eating lunch…
Bethany, yes, got it, will e-mail you back.
Doug,
eating lunch…
last meal? lol
Mama,
That link was fantastic…does eating the unborn calf constitute eating beef for a Hindu…BRILLIANT!
does eating the unborn calf constitute eating beef for a Hindu
The “beef” is not a matter of belief.
Milehi,
Where do you find these things?
Cerebral. Very cerebral.
Doug,
That was the whole point of the article…How can you argue that a fetus is not a person/human…it’s not a matter of belief. Any more than the unborn calf being beef is belief.
I know that you don’t disagree with this, but there are many, many, many pro choicers that do…that was the point of this article. Obviously, it wasn’t directed to you, but to those who still argue that the unborn child is not a human being.
JohnCWright’s using what’s called the substance argument. Nicely argued I might add – although a bit much with the cannibalism. ;-)
Thanks for the reference MileHiMama.
Interesting:
http://www.yaledailynews.com/articles/view/24651
That was the whole point of the article…How can you argue that a fetus is not a person/human…it’s not a matter of belief. Any more than the unborn calf being beef is belief.
Auugghhhh, MK. We have been over this before.
The unborn are definitely human and alive. But “person” IS a belief, here – that is what the debate is about. I know you don’t want to hear about society’s position, etc., and what is left is the belief of people.
The physical reality of the unborn is one thing, whether we know of it or not, whether we agree with another person, or not, etc. What is being argued here is whether we should attribute certain status to the unborn or not.
……
I know that you don’t disagree with this, but there are many, many, many pro choicers that do…that was the point of this article. Obviously, it wasn’t directed to you, but to those who still argue that the unborn child is not a human being.
Sigh. Yet again, it depends on what is meant by “human being.” If it means nothing more than “living human organism,” that is one thing. There are other things, however, things like having had rights attributed to it (the legal sense), etc.
Posted by: Laura at April 23, 2008 1:10 PM:
There have been two really interesting stories this week.
The Governor of Kansas vetoed some fairly harsh abortion legislation, and the Governor of Alaska gave birth to a child with Down syndrome knowing the child was afflicted.
I think both of those stories would be of more interest to the “life” crowd than whether or not some fruitloop at Yale is fingerpainting with her own revolting bodily fluids. (Heck, if her preferred medium was lymph it might have been more interesting…)
Posted by: Laura at April 24, 2008 6:14 PM:
Interesting:
http://www.yaledailynews.com/articles/view/24651
Why is the Yale story suddenly so interesting? There’s not much change to the story.
Why is the Yale story suddenly so interesting? There’s not much change to the story.
Posted by: Janet at April 24, 2008 6:49 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Because any rational person knew that it was BS from the very start, but pro-lifers had to beat it into the dust.
According to your link: Official: No human blood in studio
Scientific test potentially inconclusive because full project may not have been examined
Laura: Rational people apparently still don’t know.
Laura,
I just posted to you on the other thread…they still haven’t found that priest, but they have found the balloons….really strange.
Doug,
I emailed you. I’ll be leaving in about 15 minutes, so if I don’t hear from you, I’ll catch you in the am.
Doug,
That’s why I said the argument wasn’t really directed to you. It is directed to those who are not arguing personhood, but those who are arguing whether it is a human being or not.
I am finally catching on that arguing with you over the babies rights are futile.
We think it is ridiculous to have to actually single out and explicitly list the unborn as worthy of rights, just like it was ridiculous to have to explicitly say that blacks have equal rights. To us it is a given. We are all human, we should all have the same rights.
Agreed that we don’t and this is why you always sidetrack the argument…you want us to admit that the unborn DON’T have equal rights…by law…and we want you to acknowledge that to us that is insane. There shouldn’t be a need to afford them rights, any more than there should be a need to afford midgets rights. They are human. They should have the same rights as ALL humans and it shouldn’t be necessary to say so in a seperate forum. It’s nuts.
By that reasoning the Declaration of Independence would be 10,000 pages long, listing every possible type of human being so that no one is left out.
I’m pretty sure all men are created equal covers EVERYONE! Even women, tho it doesn’t actually say so.And before you say that that had to be clarified too, let me say that I think THAT was ridiculous and self evident also.
mk,
Doug’s problem with the declaration of independence acknowleging basic human rights and that extending to unborn babies would probably have something to do with this line “endowed by their Creator.”
Elizabeth G,
Doug claims that the right to life has not been EXPLICITLY given to the unborn, and it cannot be assumed that they are included in “all men”…and yet, nowhere does it EXPLICITLY say that women have a right to abortion…yet he is comfortable with that inference…why is it okay to infer that abortion is a right, but not okay to infer that life is when it comes to the unborn?
It doesn’t say explicitly that women or children are included in “all men”, either, that is inferred as well.
Mama,
Exactly. Now which inference takes the greater leap. All men are created equal, includes men, women, children, feeble, black, white, unborn and midgets…or right to privacy means you can kill your own child because it isn’t born?
mk, I agree with you. What I’m saying is that the declaration of independence recognizes these right because they were given by the individual’s Creator.
If rights are granted by legal entities or scientist or public opinion, then they are subject to change and are not unalienable.
If however the right to life is endowed by the person’s Creator at the moment of creation, then no other man can alienate that right.
Doug has stated that his estimation is that people should be granted basics rights at the moment they become and so long as they remain “aware”. He also has stated that this is the majority opinion and thus is what we do and should base our laws upon.
Therefore, it filters down to whom grants basic human rights and who it is that defines humanity.
I assume he means a permanent state of awareness, sleeping doesn’t count? Exactly how long or impermanent does the state of unawareness need to be?
Elizabeth G said:
Exactly.
Doug doesn’t have the concept of intrinsic nature, because he’s rejecting the substance on the grounds that sentience and awareness are critical to the “being”.
Which means Doug firmly believes that morality is subjective (and he has declared that is his position). Clearly he has no basis to say anyone is right or wrong on this, it just is.
Again – why should anyone listen to someone who’s amoral?
MK: That’s why I said the argument wasn’t really directed to you. It is directed to those who are not arguing personhood, but those who are arguing whether it is a human being or not.
MK, it depends on what is meant by “human being.” If we are just talking about “living, human organism,” then it certainly applies to the unborn – and who do you see saying the unborn are not that?
……
I am finally catching on that arguing with you over the babies rights are futile. We think it is ridiculous to have to actually single out and explicitly list the unborn as worthy of rights, just like it was ridiculous to have to explicitly say that blacks have equal rights. To us it is a given. We are all human, we should all have the same rights.
IMO the argument starts before that, MK. I agree with you on “human being,” but not all human beings are in that “we” you mention, at least in my opinion, and that’s why you and I disagree.
……
Agreed that we don’t and this is why you always sidetrack the argument…you want us to admit that the unborn DON’T have equal rights…by law…and we want you to acknowledge that to us that is insane. There shouldn’t be a need to afford them rights, any more than there should be a need to afford midgets rights. They are human. They should have the same rights as ALL humans and it shouldn’t be necessary to say so in a seperate forum. It’s nuts.
I don’t “sidetrack” it. The law is a given, pretty much. And I realize how you feel.
……
By that reasoning the Declaration of Independence would be 10,000 pages long, listing every possible type of human being so that no one is left out.
Nope, it really was white, male landowners telling King George to piss off.
…..
I’m pretty sure all men are created equal covers EVERYONE! Even women, tho it doesn’t actually say so.And before you say that that had to be clarified too, let me say that I think THAT was ridiculous and self evident also.
It not only did not include women, really, it didn’t include many minorities, non-landowning men, etc.
Doug’s problem with the declaration of independence acknowleging basic human rights and that extending to unborn babies would probably have something to do with this line “endowed by their Creator.”
Elizabeth, I have no problem with the DOI. It is what it is, and it was what it was. Has nothing to do with the unborn.
Many of the “founding fathers” did believe in a supernatural deity, certainly. But they were not into “basic human rights” beyond getting England off their backs – and that “their” was only for a small minority of people in the Colonies.
Additionally, abortion was legal to a point in gestation before, during, and after the writing of the DOI, and the same is true for the Constitution.
Doug has stated that his estimation is that people should be granted basics rights at the moment they become and so long as they remain “aware”. He also has stated that this is the majority opinion and thus is what we do and should base our laws upon.
Elizabeth, not really. It’s not just “awareness,” it’s awareness plus the fact that the unborn are inside the body of a thinking, feeling person – that changes things a lot, versus it only being a question of aware or not.
It’s also not “granting rights to people.” It’s not a person yet, as we are talking about the unborn – it’s part of the debate and it goes to our perceived “shoulds” and “should nots.”
It also doesn’t have to be majority opinion. I never said that the majority has to rule. In no way would I necessarily agree with the majority, per se.
Milehimama: I assume he means a permanent state of awareness, sleeping doesn’t count? Exactly how long or impermanent does the state of unawareness need to be?
Mom, no, sleeping doesn’t count. ; )
And it wouldn’t matter anyway, unless you’re talking about the unborn.
Chris: Doug doesn’t have the concept of intrinsic nature, because he’s rejecting the substance on the grounds that sentience and awareness are critical to the “being”.
That’s silly. Of course I “have the concept.” I realize that the argument is not over intrinsic things, though.
……
Therefore, it filters down to whom grants basic human rights and who it is that defines humanity.
No – if you want to argue “humanity,” okay, but the “human” of the unborn here is not at issue. It is society, our laws, etc., that apply rights and personhood.
……
Which means Doug firmly believes that morality is subjective (and he has declared that is his position).
By definition it is. Morality is ideas of what we want and what we don’t want. It is ideals of “right” and “wrong” and “good” and “bad” in this realm of thought. It is internal to the mind, not external to it. “Subjective,” by definition.
……
Clearly he has no basis to say anyone is right or wrong on this, it just is.
Wrong again. To know the “right” or “wrong,” all you need to know is what’s desired. Or what individual or group we are talking about and their opinion. Is female genital mutilation right or wrong? I’d bet that in all or almost all the opinions of people posting here, it’s wrong. Yet in some parts of the world, under the existing religious and cultural feelings, it’s right. In the moral realm, right/wrong/good/bad is always in the opinion of “somebody.” And, if there are “higher beings” than us earthly humans, then they too may have their feelings about it.
……
Again – why should anyone listen to someone who’s amoral?
I’m no more amoral than you are. We just disagree about some things.
Doug,
Oh, so you discriminate based solely on where someone lives. Gotcha.
Mile high mom: Oh, so you discriminate based solely on where someone lives. Gotcha.
Nope. It’s the fact that it’s not a sentient “someone” in the first place, and that it’s inside the body of a person.