Sunday funnies

by Gary Varvel of Townhall.com...

cartoon 3-15 gary varvel pba no escr.gif

by Gary Varvel of Townhall.com...

cartoon 3-15 gary varvel largest.gif

by Chuck Asay of Townhall.com...

cartoon chuck asay life liberty.gif

Below are cartoons depicting how the other side sees it, the worst first (warning: pro-lifers with high blood pressure should not view)...

by Clay Jones of GoComics.com...

cartoon 3-15 clay jones abort president bush.gif

by Walt Handelsman of GoComics.com...

cartoon 3-15 walt handelsman 3-12 bush detainees.gif

by Steve Sack of GoComics.com...

cartoon 3-15 steve sack 3-12 poppopop.gif

by Tony Auth of GoComics.com...

cartoon 3-15 tony auth ideology monster.gif

by Drew Sheneman of GoComics.com...

cartoon 3-15 drw sheneman going up.gif


Comments:

LOVE the last five, Jill.

Posted by: reality at March 15, 2009 9:46 AM


Reality-challenged, eh?

Posted by: Jon at March 15, 2009 9:52 AM


Did anyone read Krauthammer's article on ESCR? He supports using discarded embryo's but draws his line there. Apparantly he was invited to attend the signing, but refused because he realzied that Obama wanted NO restrictions what so ever.

Anyways, the closing line was brillient. It was a quote from one of the founding fathers of ESCR, ""if human embryonic stem cell research does not make you at least a little bit uncomfortable, you have not thought about it enough."

The whole article is great. Though the pro-life community will disagree with krauthhammer on the explicit santity of life, I think we'll find much to celebrate in the article.

Here's the link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/12/AR2009031202764.html

Posted by: Lauren at March 15, 2009 10:08 AM


Did President George W. Bush prohibit embryonic stem cell research?

If Bush did, then show me the executive order.

If there is no such executive order then please explain how these sunday comics are relevant.

My recollection is that the executive order issued by George W. Bush only prohibited the use of 'federal funds' for human embryonic stem cell research.

Private investors were free to fund the research which seemed most promising to them to produce beneficial results.

So we are back to the 'liberal humanist' pracitice of confiscating money from the producers and redistributing it according to their 'enlightened' perspective so that no research would be neglected for what they consider 'politcally incorrect' reasons.

Just another form of liberal humnist 'affirmative action'.

Never mind that the 'free market' has looked into the efficacy of utilizing human embryonic stem cells and determined that there is a better way and are currently pursuing that better way and getting good results that has and will continue to produce a profitable product that benefits people.

Science, subordingated to socialism and political correctness, will produce ineffective, inefficient, unreliable and unprofitable results.

yor bro ken


So the

Did


Posted by: kbhvac at March 15, 2009 10:12 AM


Lauren,

Yes I did, it was great...

Posted by: Jasper at March 15, 2009 10:13 AM


Also, we need to SCREAM from the rooftops that Obama is anti-science.

He overturned funding for alternative stem cell research. Why the hell would he do that unless to a)smite conservatives at the expense of science or b)smite science?

We have got to get the message out there about the progress of ethical stem cells and how Obama has now done the exact thing he lambasted Bush for doing- taken funding from science.

This message HAS to get out.

Posted by: Lauren at March 15, 2009 10:28 AM


Lauren: "He overturned funding for alternative stem cell research..."

Do you have any credible authority for that statement, or is this just another case of making it up?

Posted by: Bystander at March 15, 2009 10:33 AM


Bystander, yes I have credible authority.

In 2007, Bush ordered executive order 13435

It stated ""The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall conduct and support research on the isolation, derivation, production, and testing of stem cells that are capable of producing all or almost all of the cell types of the developing body and may result in improved understanding of or treatments for diseases and other adverse health conditions, but are derived without creating a human embryo for research purposes or destroying, discarding, or subjecting to harm a human embryo or fetus."

Obama struck down the entire executive order.

Posted by: Lauren at March 15, 2009 10:44 AM


"We have got to get the message out there about the progress of ethical stem cells and how Obama has now done the exact thing he lambasted Bush for doing- taken funding from science."

Agreed Lauren, although it's very hard when we have a MSM covering for Obama. The MSM has also distorted Bush's record on ESCR. How many times have I seem the MSM say that Bush was against 'Stem Cell research', when clearly he was against ESCR...

Posted by: Jasper at March 15, 2009 10:49 AM


Jasper,

What we have is a MSM that are lapdogs of Obama and not watchdogs of government, which, unknown to them, is what true journalists do. But then what would these clowns know about journalism?
These guys make me miss Sam Donaldson.

We can only hope Tom Brokaw can stop blubbering about awe-struck seagulls and Chris Matthews can get over his leg tingles and start doing their jobs.

Posted by: Mary at March 15, 2009 10:54 AM


This has nothing to do with stem cells, so I feel bad saying this, but since I actually supported Obama and cheered him on when he won, I'm a little peeved that he first decided to expand abortion when there are two genocides in Africa and any numerous crises that need his attention. Again, I don't have much to say as far as stem cell research goes, but the comic where he said, "It's above my pay grade," reminds me of all of his comments regarding children's rights and I can't help thinking, "But I supported you because I thought that you would actually implement programs that would help reduce the pressure on the poor and therefore reduce abortion."

I supposed, as much as a naive fool as you might reckon me (and I deserve it), that Obama would be a glorious change. As it turns out, and as I really detest confessing, he's just a politician.

Posted by: Vannah at March 15, 2009 11:01 AM


Vannah, don't feel too bad, he fooled a lot of people. Now you know, and we can get him OUT come the next election.

Posted by: Lauren at March 15, 2009 11:09 AM


Vannah,

Don't be so hard on yourself. I've been taken in more times by people than I care to admit to, even to myself.
Its called live and learn.
Obama is a man of incredible charisma and IMO a textbook sociopath.
Read the book "The Sociopath Next Door" by Martha Stout, Ph.D. I wish I had about 40 years ago! Its a great way to inform and protect yourself where sociopaths, who are master manipulators, are concerned.

Posted by: Mary at March 15, 2009 11:15 AM


Bush's executive orders were designed to stop federal funding of ESC research. The referenced order did not fund, and Obama did not "overturn" any funding of non-ESC research. The new order merely allows federal funding of both ESC and non-ESC research, so researchers can determine the most effective way to use stem cells to prevent and cure disease.

Posted by: Bystander at March 15, 2009 11:21 AM


Do you think that he will create programs for the poor or for children? He hasn't had much time in office yet, but thus far he's accomplished just about everything except F.O.C.A., help for Darfur, and quality social programs.

I mean, I suppose that we could be positive that good news still springs out of the ground, and that no president, Obama or Republican, can stay in office longer than eight years, and that every hit that children's rights takes will only make it sweeter when infanticide and other wretched anti-human rights practices are abolished. Right?

Posted by: Vannah at March 15, 2009 11:22 AM


No, Bush's 2007 executive order was to specifically fund adult stem cell research and was worded in such a way to distinguish adult from embryonic for the purposes of the order. It did not ban funding from embryonic, just clairify that this specific funding was to go towards non-embryonic stem cell research.

The 2001 executive order was the one the prohibited funding of ESCR other than what could be performed using existing cell lines.

There was no reason to strike down the 2007 executive order.

Posted by: Lauren at March 15, 2009 11:25 AM


Some of those seem pro-liberal to me, but I guess it could be up to individual interpretation.

Where do we send video ideas to Bethany? I have some AMAZING ones that make me soooooo happy!

Posted by: Leah at March 15, 2009 11:26 AM


Leah, the ones after the jump are liberal.

Posted by: Lauren at March 15, 2009 11:29 AM


Vannah,

I foresee nothing but a self serving, inept, and conscienceless leader paying off his supporters one way or another. He will have his hands full just trying to be a manager, something he has little experience in doing.
Also the world tyrants are taking notice. They're evil but certainly not stupid, and know weakness and ineptness when they see it.
I think we have every reason to be very afraid.

Posted by: Mary at March 15, 2009 11:30 AM


Yes, science is the new "god" of this administration, and Obama is its high priest.

I have nothing against science as God has allowed many blessings through its proper application. However, when its practice is not restrained by morality and faith, it becomes a curse. This is everywhere to be found in the history of science and we can extrapolate this effect to the newer sciences of human cloning, genetics, etc. Eventually, and by the ruse of relativistic humanism, it will be argued that the benefits of cloning and genetics trump moralilty.

The godless media's elevation of science to a god is another black mark on their profession and evidence of their abandonment of principal. They are no better than the hawkers at carnivals whose job it is to lure you in so you can be cheated.

We are certainly entering an age of even greater evil than history has ever experienced. Yes, this was satan's offer to Eve in the Garden when he told her, "you will be like God". Isn't really this the deep and hugely immoral desire of every fallen human being to be like God, to be in control of one's own destiny? The immutable reality is there is only one God and to fight and rebel against Him by acting and doing things that are against His will, i.e., sin, results in eternal death.

Satan knows this, he knows his inexorable destiny, but is not telling anyone. What he does tell people who want to hear what they want to hear is, "you can be be like God".
These same wayward spirits are willing to listen to his lies and roll the dice with their eternal souls as the wager. He probably made the same offer to the the third of angels who rebelled against God and as a result fell from the splendor of Heaven. I mean, why change something that works?

As for me, I surrender my destiny to God by placing my faith and trust in God by accepting His Son as Lord and Savior. If this means being pro-life, then so be it. If this results in my life here being taken, so be it, for the glory of heaven awaits. God promises this and I beleive Him.

Romans 1:20-35
20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

28Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. 29They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.


Posted by: HisMan at March 15, 2009 11:32 AM


Ohhhh... haha. I should read stuff. Thanks. :)

Posted by: Leah at March 15, 2009 11:45 AM


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OBlgSz8sSM&feature=related

Posted by: Leah at March 15, 2009 12:10 PM


I love that video, Leah. Those kids are great.

Posted by: Lauren at March 15, 2009 12:14 PM


This is how I've been spending my morning, Lauren. :)

Posted by: Leah at March 15, 2009 12:18 PM


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmkKS_6zIRA&feature=related

Life is good.

Posted by: Leah at March 15, 2009 12:46 PM


That's right, Lauren. Here http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Removing-Barriers-to-Responsible-Scientific-Research-Involving-Human-Stem-Cells/ is where Obama revoked Executive Order 13435, and here http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/pdf/07-3112.pdf in a pdf is the text of Executive order 13435. Obama hates everything Bush so much that he is willing to put ideology over science. Gee, who recently mentioned putting ideology over science in a speech?

Posted by: Bobby Bambino Author Profile Page at March 15, 2009 1:06 PM


Lauren: "He overturned funding for alternative stem cell research..."

Do you have any credible authority for that statement, or is this just another case of making it up?

Posted by: Bystander at March 15, 2009 10:33 AM


She's either completely making it up, or is possibly just ignorant.

Executive Order 13435 (complete text here: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13435) supplemented Bush's 2001 ban on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research as well as mandated exploration of other types of stem cell research.

It was revoked by Executive Order 13501 (complete text found here: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/pdf/E9-5441.pdf), which, as noted, only revokes 13435, thus lifting the ban on ESCR, but NOT, contrary to Lauren's assertion, overturning funding for other types of SCR.

Posted by: Penny Dreadful at March 15, 2009 1:24 PM


Bobby, how is it that Obama allowing federal funding of all types of stem cell research, and letting the results determine which is most effective at preventing or curing disease "putting ideology over science"?

It seem to me that Bush not allowing federal funding of one type of stem cell research for religious reasons is "putting ideology over science."

Posted by: Bystander at March 15, 2009 1:31 PM


Penny, no executive order 13435 did nothing to ban funding for ESCR. It simply provided funding for adult research and reaffirmed the that embryos were unique, human lifeforms.

There was no reason to overturn it. Doing so stripped adult stem cell research of explicit support.

Posted by: Lauren at March 15, 2009 1:32 PM


Penny Dreadful is absolutely right. Thanks for clearing that up.

Posted by: Bystander at March 15, 2009 1:34 PM


No, Penny Dreadful is absolutely wrong. Nothing has been cleared up.

Posted by: Lauren at March 15, 2009 1:35 PM


Lauren,

You are wrong. 13435 was intended as a supplement to Bush's 2001 criteria. Here is the relevant text:

(a) The Secretary of Health and Human Services (Secretary) shall conduct and support research on the isolation, derivation, production, and testing of stem cells that are capable of producing all or almost all of the cell types of the developing body and may result in improved understanding of or treatments for diseases and other adverse health conditions, but are derived without creating a human embryo for research purposes or destroying, discarding, or subjecting to harm a human embryo or fetus.
(b) Within 90 days of this order, the Secretary, after such consultation with the Director of the National Institutes of Health (Director), shall issue a plan, including such mechanisms as requests for proposals, requests for applications, program announcements and other appropriate means, to implement subsection(a) of this section, that:
(i) specifies and reflects a determination of the extent to which specific techniques may require additional basic or animal research to ensure that any research involving human cells using these techniques is clearly consistent with the standards established under this order and applicable law;
(ii) prioritizes research with the greatest potential for clinical benefit;
(iii) takes into account techniques outlined by the President's Council on Bioethics, and any other appropriate techniques and research, provided they clearly meet the standard set forth in subsection(a) of this section;
(iv) renames the "Human Embryonic Stem Cell Registry" the "Human Pluripotent Stem Cell Registry;" and
(v) adds to the registry new human pluripotent stem cell lines that clearly meet the standard set forth in subsection (a) of this section.
(c) Not later than December 31 of each year, the Secretary shall report to the President on the activities carried out under this order during the past fiscal year, including a description of the research carried out or supported by the Department of Health and Human Services, including the National Institutes of Health, and other developments in the science of pluripotent stem cells not derived from human embryos.


I've highlighted the relevant language for ease of reference. It clearly states that no federal funding will go to ESCR.

Posted by: Penny Dreadful at March 15, 2009 1:40 PM


The other night I happened to catch news on PBS and was refreshed to hear, finally, even from sources who usually praise Obama, criticism about embryo experimentation. The words DEEPLY DISTURBING were even used!

Posted by: klyn73 at March 15, 2009 1:41 PM


Penny, you are misreading the text.

The part you bolded is not prohibiting embryonic stem cell research, but rather further explaining that this specific funding for this specific research is for use on adult pluripotent stem cells, not human embryonic stem cells.

Posted by: Lauren at March 15, 2009 1:43 PM


Please ignore Bystander and Penny Dreadful. If they have something constructive to say, then we can listen and work towards a decent solution, but if they only want to moan and get people angry, then we are doing a great diservice to anyone who might wish to read this commentary in the hopes of learning something of means.

So, to get back on topic, just out of curiosity, what results have come from cord blood stem cells? Nothing yet has come from embryonic stem cells, and there have been successes in adult stem cells, but I never hear anything about cord blood. What about you? Anything?

Posted by: Vannah at March 15, 2009 1:46 PM


Sure Lauren. So in your world, mandating that funding shall go to X but not Y really means that you can fund Y. You folks really do work hard to create your own reality.

Posted by: Penny Dreadful at March 15, 2009 1:47 PM


Penny, taken on its own 13435 does nothing to prohibit funds going to embryonic stem cell research.

Vannah- there have been tons! Let me pull up a page that lists them real quick for you. It's really encouaraging!

Posted by: Lauren at March 15, 2009 1:53 PM


Here's a study that goes over some of the adult successes, Vannah.

http://www.cogforlife.org/adultStemCellSuccess.htm

I know I remember seeing a list somewhere, but I can't remember where. I'll try to find that too. :)

Posted by: Lauren at March 15, 2009 1:56 PM


Thank you, Ms. Lauren! How long has cord blood testing been going on? I've only heard about it the past couple of months, but I am certain that it's been longer than that.

Posted by: Vannah at March 15, 2009 1:57 PM


I believe this is an updated list:

http://www.frc.org/insight/adult-stem-cell-success-stories-2008-update-july-december

Posted by: Lauren at March 15, 2009 2:00 PM


Vannah, I'm not sure how long cord blood research has been going on. I know it was happening when I was pregnant with my first child in 04.

There are also other types of adult stem cells that show great promise. For example, researchers have discovered a way to make skin cells mimic the way embryonic stem cells act.

Here's an article on that: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/01/AR2009030101741.html

Posted by: Lauren at March 15, 2009 2:04 PM


Ok Lauren, so let's sum up your point of view on this topic.

According to you, Bush's order, although it specifically says that funding can go only to non-embryonic SCR, doesn't do anything to ban ESCR.

Also according to you, Obama's order that revoked Bush's order, although it says nothing at all about funding for non-embryonic SCR, actually bans funding for non-embryonic SCR.

And in other news, black is white, up is down, and bald is a hair color.

Posted by: Penny Dreadful at March 15, 2009 2:06 PM


Penny, Bush's order specificially made a "task force" if you will, to study and fund non-embryonic stem cell research.

This act alone did nothing to ban funding of embryonic stem cell research, it just didn't include it in the "task force."

Obama did away with the "task force" all together.

It's not really a difficult concept to understand.

Posted by: Lauren at March 15, 2009 2:10 PM


So the debate over stem cells from embryos could be moot soon? Oh that's wonderful! Thank God!

Posted by: Vannah at March 15, 2009 2:12 PM


Vannah, yes it could. The problem is that there are people who wish to continue the debate because they have nefarious intentions that go beyond simply providing cures for dieases.

Bobby did a good job outlining this in a previous thread. Let me see if I can find it.

Posted by: Lauren at March 15, 2009 2:15 PM


Ah yes the false dichotomy: religion vs. science. In reality it is ethics vs. certain forms of scientific experimentation. What I find interesting about this is that they caricature pro-lifers as scientifically illiterate when it is precisely BECAUSE they are literate that pro-lifers do not support embryonic stem cell research.

It's not like people were opposed to stem cell research for it's own sake either. I for one am quite excited about it. Not only does it have the ability to cure diseases but also could cause revolutionary advances in gerontology.

I'm kind of surprised the researchers went down this road actually. I understand that they would eventually want to do experimentation with human ES cells. However, due to the fact they were at this stage only conducting basic research that would not be suitable for human trials anyway, why not experiment with chimp ES cells in the meantime to get all of the basic workings figured out? By the time they were done with that, other labs would have developed artificial ways to produce human ES cells which they could then use in trials on humans. That way it would not even have slowed their research, and everyone would have been happy.

In reality I suspect this was done more as a PR stunt to discredit the pro-life view of personhood. Politicians who opposed fetal rights understood that if they could find a few researchers who did want to use human ES cells then they could constantly stress a harder point of the model of personhood used by pro-lifers to try to discredit us.

Posted by: Johanan Raatz at March 15, 2009 2:22 PM


Johanan said "In reality I suspect this was done more as a PR stunt to discredit the pro-life view of personhood. Politicians who opposed fetal rights understood that if they could find a few researchers who did want to use human ES cells then they could constantly stress a harder point of the model of personhood used by pro-lifers to try to discredit us."

This would be one of the nefarious agendas I was talking about!

Posted by: Lauren at March 15, 2009 2:28 PM


"Ah yes the false dichotomy: religion vs. science"

Your go-to straw man since 1962.

Posted by: Bobby Bambino Author Profile Page at March 15, 2009 2:30 PM


Bobby, that made me laugh out loud.

Of course, it's not so funny considering we're talking about something used to support killing of untold millions of human beings...

Posted by: Lauren at March 15, 2009 2:31 PM


Leah, you can send any video ideas to bethany(at)jillstanek. Or mail(at)sketchesbybethany.net! :)

P.s. I LOVE Charlie bit my finger...I actually have that one set to appear sometime soon. The whole family has watched it a few dozen times. lol It never stops being funny. :D

Posted by: Bethany at March 15, 2009 2:57 PM


Thanks Bethany!

I spent my morning looking at cute videos like that... now I'm doing a French report on genetically modified foods. Which do I prefer?

I'll send you some good clips.

Posted by: Leah at March 15, 2009 3:33 PM


My kids definitely have some moments like Charlie and his older brother.

Holden likes to put his head up to Anna. When she pulls his hair he goes "Annnnnaa don't pull my hair!" Anna just laughs.

Posted by: Lauren at March 15, 2009 3:43 PM


Off topic blurb:

French report? I'm intensly jealous. I wish that I could speak French. :(

Back on Topic:

I've got nothing.

Posted by: Vannah at March 15, 2009 3:59 PM


Asitis:

You asked about the death pose found in fossils all over the world that are evidence of a catastrophic flood:

http://www.ianjuby.org/death_pose/index.html

Posted by: HisMan at March 15, 2009 3:59 PM


Vannah 3:59PM

Check into Rosetta Stone language software. I am reviewing my French with it and its great. My difficulty is with understanding so it helps me a great deal to listen to native speakers.

Posted by: Mary at March 15, 2009 4:27 PM


"It seem to me that Bush not allowing federal funding of one type of stem cell research for religious reasons is 'putting ideology over science.'"

What "religious" reasons are those? Embryonic research requires the destruction of human embryos, who are human beings, according to scientific fact. Where's the religion in that?

Posted by: bmmg39 at March 15, 2009 4:29 PM


Vannah:

The top three things I would recommend to ALL people who want to learn ANY language:

-Go to a country that speaks the language you want to learn. It's the only way to learn real colloquial language.

-Study linguistics, especially if you have a little background in a foreign language. It helps you understand on a whole new level.

-If neither of those are viable options, do what Mary said: Rosetta Stone. Definitely the best language software out there. Unfortunately it is a bit expensive. Also, use in conjunction with a dictionary because it's light on the vocab.

French is awesome. You should definitely learn it.

Posted by: Leah at March 15, 2009 5:09 PM


you should have been aborted! you nazi anti-choice pro-overpopulationist, imagine how wonderful the world would be had hitler been aborted, or how wonderful america would be had george w bush been aborted!!!!! my body my choice, your body your choice, if you wanna make a choice for me, and i dont like it, you wont like the choice i make for you! you should get a hobby.

Posted by: Melissa Clayton at March 15, 2009 6:01 PM


Melissa, you must be having a bad day, sorry.

"if you wanna make a choice for me, and i don't like it, you wont like the choice i make for you"?

Exactly, except the problem is the babies can't retaliate. They're dead.

Posted by: Jill Stanek at March 15, 2009 6:04 PM


I have books on three different languages. I've studied Latin for three years now, Spanish for about a year and a half, and French for, well, two days.

Thanks for the advice!

Gratias amicae!

Good luck on your French report.

Posted by: Vannah at March 15, 2009 6:04 PM


you should have been aborted! you nazi anti-choice pro-overpopulationist, imagine how wonderful the world would be had hitler been aborted, or how wonderful america would be had george w bush been aborted!!!!! my body my choice, your body your choice, if you wanna make a choice for me, and i dont like it, you wont like the choice i make for you! you should get a hobby.


Posted by: Melissa Clayton at March 15, 2009 6:01 PM

Melissa, instead of just yelling catch phrases at us, would you like to show some evidence for each of your assertions?

Posted by: Lauren at March 15, 2009 6:10 PM


Peace, Ms. Clayton, and please don't be so irate. We aren't making any decisions for you. We just want to come together to find out what is the best way to improve the status of children, both preborn and born.

And, um, I'm not certain where Hitler came from, but it was a tragic event, and, if I might point out, preventing another Holocaust comes by respecting the rights, lives, and freedoms of all people, not by valuing one group over the other.

I hope that you stay and talk. But, in respect to yourself and others, I hope that we can converse peacefully rather than angrily?

Posted by: Vannah at March 15, 2009 6:12 PM


Mellissa:

You've got it wrong. NAZIs were pro-death not pro-life.

In fact, it is pro-choicers just like you who more closely resemble NAZIs than pro-lifers.

Or perhaps you don't realize that NAZIism killed 50,000,000 worldwide during WWII and that pro-choicsm has murdered 1,000,000,000 people worldwide since 1973. You've got the NAZIs beat by 20 times.

Look, if you're upset today I suggest you put the knives away and go lock yourself up in a closet before the Secret Service finds out you've just threatened the life of a former President. Also, I understand the United States Post Office has a Nutcase in Training With Irate Temper Hotline (NITWIT).

Hey, anybody got the link to the FBI and Secret Service hotlines? Jill, you do know this insane person's IP address don't you?

Posted by: HisMan at March 15, 2009 6:16 PM


Melissa,

What if Gandhi had been aborted? What if Mother Theresa had been aborted? What if Martin Luther King Jr. had been aborted?

How would you have advised Obama's mother in the early 1960's when she was a single white woman pregnant by a black man? Do you have any idea how she and her child would be reviled in that era?

What if YOU had been aborted?

Posted by: Mary at March 15, 2009 6:19 PM


Vannah 6:04PM

Je vous en prie.

Posted by: Mary at March 15, 2009 6:22 PM


Leah, Mary, Vannah, I don't know if you guys ever watch Flight of the Conchords, but I think you'll like this video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUVagbFcSUU

Posted by: Lauren at March 15, 2009 6:28 PM


Uh, what does Je vous en prie mean? I'll add it to my collection of foreign phrases if you tell me. :). Oh, wait, it's not a disapproving statement is it? :(. Two days of French and I'm not very far...

Posted by: Vannah at March 15, 2009 6:29 PM


Vannah,

"Its not a disapproving statement is it"?

Pas de tout mon amie, it translates loosely into "you're welcome" in English!

Posted by: Mary at March 15, 2009 6:39 PM


Hooray! Happy French!

Posted by: Vannah at March 15, 2009 6:47 PM


Vannah, I know that in China, there has been some experimental treatments with umbilical cord blood cells. One of the diseases being treated is optic nerve hypoplasia. A little boy from my home state went to China with his family to receive treatments. In addition to optic nerve hypoplasia, he also has autism. They saw improvement in his behavior and he could even start to see the flashlight in his eye.

http://www.bignsite.com/angelsunaware/kasen_s_blog


And here's the story of a little girl with the same eye disease:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/03/10/national/main4856566.shtml?source=RSSattr=U.S._4856566


These are UMBILICAL CORD BLOOD cells. Not embryonic.

Posted by: LizFromNebraska at March 15, 2009 6:51 PM


That's wonderful news!

Posted by: Vannah at March 15, 2009 6:56 PM


Penny,

Can you not read or are you just unable to parse the construction of an argument?

How does "We will give money to stem cells not derived from embryos" mean "we will NOT give money to stem cells derived from embryos?"

Let me make it simple for you.

If stem stell not derived from embryos -> funding

The only logical manipulation you can do is what is called the "contrapositive(sp?)" In other words, you can reverse and negate the terms. You cannot simply negate the terms as you have suggested. Here is an example.

Correct:

NO funding -> NOT stem cells not derived from embryos

Incorrect(what you suggested):

NOT stem cells not derived from embryos -> NO funding

Technically, using your language, any research about anything that is not adult SC research will not be funded.

Hopefully in the future you will decide to actually consider the substance of your arrogant claims a little more.

Black is white indeed!

To summarize,

This order specifically provides funding for non ESCR, known more commonly as adult stem cell research.

Obama struck it down.

Obama stopped the specific funding or adult stem cell research.

Its actually very simple. Then again, if youre so confused on whats happening, maybe Obama is too?

Posted by: Oliver at March 15, 2009 7:44 PM


Bystander: "Penny Dreadful is absolutely right. Thanks for clearing that up."

Careful with the kool-aid buddy. You can get yourself into some trouble! Actually read and think on your own. Its much safer.

(In case you miss the commentary, re-read the original article and see for yourself that ESCR is not in fact banned, or else all research other than ASCR is banned.)

Posted by: Oliver at March 15, 2009 7:48 PM


Yeah, "je vous en prie" can mean please or thank you. It's such fun!

If you've studied Latin and Spanish, French should be easy. French is harder than Spanish I think, but from what I've heard it's easier than Latin.

I've finished my report, alhamdulillah. It's about genetically modified vs. organic food. Boring, man. Boring.

I can go back to watching you tube videos now.

Posted by: Leah at March 15, 2009 7:51 PM


French isnt bad. I tried to teach myself Gaelic and I couldnt even figure out how to read the letters. The sounds changes drastically depending on what letters or next to each other...its a headache.

Posted by: Oliver at March 15, 2009 7:55 PM


LizFromNebraska 6:51PM

Isn't it embarassing that an American citizen must travel to China for ASC treatment?

Almost as embarassing as a famous American entertainer, Don Ho, having to travel to Thailand for ASC treatment of a heart condition.

Posted by: Mary at March 15, 2009 8:06 PM


Because I'm still a beginner in French, I think that it is quite difficult. Latin isn't that hard, actually, but I also have a wonderful teacher so she clears it up. It's an inflected language, though, so it takes a lot of tears and frustration, but then it clicks. I recommend that everyone tries it, but I'm just biased.

Posted by: Vannah at March 15, 2009 8:32 PM


Spam alert.

Also, whoever asked about Flight of the Conchords--yeah... I've seen them... hi-LARIOUS!!!! My favourite is the racist fruit vendor.

Posted by: Leah at March 15, 2009 8:32 PM


Oliver--that's where the study of linguistics comes in handy. My professor is EXCELLENT too, and her PhD happens to be in Irish Gaelic--the change of Old Irish Gaelic to current. It's so cool.

Vannah--I wouldn't call French inflected any more than English. It isn't like Mandarin where you say one word two different ways and it means two different things.

A good teacher makes all the difference, eh?

Posted by: Leah at March 15, 2009 8:36 PM


Vannah,

The French don't pronounce so many letters and that's what makes it difficult. I can easily understand another American speaking French, even French Canadians. But Frenchmen themselves? Oy vey!!!!

Posted by: Mary at March 15, 2009 8:36 PM


Ive heard they are not doing a season 3. Thats too bad, but at least the episodes they have had are solid. I love the deadpan delivery from the characters. The songs are actually pretty catchy too.

Posted by: Oliver at March 15, 2009 8:36 PM


Leah: A good teacher makes all the difference, eh?"

Probably so. Still, Id much rather take a language that consitently uses its own lettering! I only did a little Korean and Hebrew, but those are examples of two solid languages with a relatively consistent pronounciation. Of course, I didnt get too deep into Gaelic either to really understand the structure.

Just curious, what do you think about the Rosseta Stone software? Ive been tempted to save up for a couple of the languages to get some basics. Think its worth it?

Posted by: Oliver at March 15, 2009 8:40 PM


Oliver--

It's really good, actually. Not so good for vocab, but that's easily remedied with a dictionary. It has exercises in reading, writing, comprehension and speaking, so it isn't just like "Hola... me llamo Raoul. Now you try... great!"

It is so pricey, and it gets a wee bit tedious after a while, but if you're really interested in getting a good base in a language I ABSOLUTELY recommend it. The base I had in French before I went to France was WAY less than the base Rosetta Stone would have given me, and I picked up French in less than three months.

Posted by: Leah at March 15, 2009 8:45 PM


Good to hear. Im a bit of a...what would you say...philolophile? I was for the longest time considering a linuistics major, but there are too many things I find more interesting for me to stick to linguistics. I wouldnt mind keeping it up as a hobby though.

Posted by: Oliver at March 15, 2009 8:56 PM


I don't think that French is inflected; I meant Latin.

Mr. Oliver- did you try Irish Gaelic or Scottish Gaelic? Or is there not much of a difference either way?

Oh, and you can do the trial version of Rosetta Stone before ordering. The trial version is in Turkish. I had an unusual experience with this version. Apparently, they show you a picture and say a word from the language and you realize that what they're saying is whatever the picture is.

In Turkish, the word for man is "adam." So I looked at the picture of the man and said, "Adam." Then it changed the picture to a different man and asked me to repeat and I said, "But I don't know his name.I just know Adam." Doh!

But actually it is a lovely software.

Posted by: Vannah at March 15, 2009 9:17 PM


It was Scottish Gaelic, and although I do not think there is a HUGE difference, I believe the basic split is between Irish and Scottish Gaelic.

Its been a while, so I may be mistaken. I do know that there are 6 Celtic languages, Irish, Scottish, Briton, Welsh, and two other random ones. I think there are two sets of 3 languages that are related to each other in some way and I believe the Irish and Scottish are on different sides. Again, I am not 100% sure on that.

Posted by: Oliver at March 15, 2009 9:21 PM


yes it is, Mary. And doctors here don't want to give any credit to these treatments IF they do work.

Posted by: LizFromNebraska at March 15, 2009 9:23 PM


Latin is not very difficult to learn - at least that is what I have found

Posted by: angel at March 15, 2009 9:24 PM


Hooray, another Latin student, another amator Latinae! How long have you been studying?

Posted by: Vannah at March 15, 2009 9:42 PM


Oliver--

This is something you and I have in common. I love languages... good thing, too, because it's one of the only things I'm good at. I would probably be a linguistics major, though, except there's only one linguistics prof at my university. It is going to be my minor, though, and I'll probably master in it.

Vannah/Mary--

I've never studied Latin. My Spanish prof said it was hard, so that's all I'm going on.

Posted by: Leah at March 15, 2009 9:58 PM


Oliver, I love the Korean alphabet. I think it was a brilliant invention! It took me like a week to learn it -- it's so intentionally geared towards literacy. Most people think it's all complicated, with eleventy billion characters like Chinese, but it's so easy. Now I can walk through Koreatown and blurt out every sign. Of course I only occasionally know what I'm saying, but whatever.

My Korean co-workers laugh at me because I frequently use the seum ni ca/ni da form for basic things. They're always like, "So formal!" It probably sounds like I'm going around saying, "And how are you this fine day, sir?" instead of "What's up?", but oh well. I figure it's better to be too polite, than unintentionally rude, and I only have time to learn so much. That's the easiest form to learn anyway. But even when I use the -yo form, like annyeong haseyo or something that I say often enough to learn and remember the different forms, sometimes I accidentally say it to someone younger than me or something and so they still laugh. I'd rather risk yo-ing someone who is "inferior" than offending someone who is superior.

Forgive my romanization! I usually try to think of Korean pronunciation in Hangeul, since they have sounds we don't have and we can't really emulate in our alphabet -- but I don't know that Korean characters would go through if I were to post them. I remember someone once had problems with Arabic here.

I am familiar enough with the language at this point that I actually once noticed a sales clerk talking to me in banmal (usually for people lower than you or familiar friends; disrespectful to use on a stranger). But I think that some Koreans consider banmal easier for non-Koreans to understand so I gave her the benefit of the doubt. I'm pretty sure she wasn't expecting me to understand at all, though, so I'm not really sure it was out of politeness rather than rudeness. Oh well -- it was pretty cool to be like, "Hey, this woman is talking down to me and I know it! Awesome!"

My favorite thing about Korean is how revealing it is about the culture. You can see all kinds of awesome things. Like the yeobo thing I mentioned a while back. Or even how, traditionally, the husband speaks to his wife in banmal but she speaks to him in jondaenmal (respectful speech). Not everyone -- at this point it's mostly older couples, or couples in media/on TV, I think. This actually became an issue a few years ago regarding subtitles in non-Korean movies -- women were being subtitled to use formal language towards men, and men were being subtitled to use informal language towards women, raising the question of whether this was adding unintended dimensions to the film or merely translating the film culturally as well as linguistically.

Posted by: Alexandra at March 15, 2009 10:04 PM


For what it's worth, I've heard mostly good things about the Rosetta Stone software, but bad things about it for Korean. Never tried it myself.

I tutor a kid in French and man, I wish he was interested in languages. It's like freaking pulling teeth with him.

Posted by: Alexandra at March 15, 2009 10:12 PM


Ms. Alexandra, your story made me laugh- "This woman is talking down to me and I know it!" So very funny!

This is a random question but does anyone know how the Chinese type? Yeah, it's stupid, but they have no alphabet? Do the compose their characters piece by piece?

Posted by: Vannah at March 15, 2009 10:16 PM


Im just curious, what is your interest in Korean based on Alexandra?

I had Korean friends growing up all my life and learned to respect their language and culture. When I found out how systematic the language was, I decided to try and learn it. Unfortunately I was never able to finish my classes.

Posted by: Oliver at March 15, 2009 10:27 PM


I had many Korean friends growing up; most of their parents had grown up in Korea and so their homes were more Korean, culturally, than American. I've also worked with a Korean company for the past two and a half years or so -- as in, a company from Korea whose employees travel here on business.

Most of the cooking I do at home is either Korean or Japanese, actually. My parents didn't cook too much when I was young, so I picked up most of my cooking skills from my friends' parents -- and I added to them at work parties, which usually begin with all of us cooking together in the biggest of the apartments the company rents. I find that Japanese dishes tend to be quicker to make, but Korean dishes are great for those "OMG I have nothing to make a meal out of" nights. There's nothing better to get rid of old kimchi than kimchi jigae -- if I've got odds and ends type veggies leftover as well, then kimchi fried rice is my go-to. On nights when I'm exhausted, pa-jeon turns whatever I have on hand into a meal. On nights when I don't get home until really late but I'm still hungry, I microwave a pre-portioned baggie of rice I've frozen (I make about a week's worth at a time), crack an egg over it, and stir it up so that the heat from the rice cooks the egg a bit -- tamago gohan! I pack a bento box for lunch most days. When I forget to pack lunch, I go to the local kimbap joint -- same price as McDonald's, way healthier. etc.

I've even gotten used to soju. One barely-remembered, but very fun, night at a karaoke room (and the excruciating morning after) taught me to drink it more slowly than its mild taste would suggest.

Posted by: Alexandra at March 15, 2009 10:44 PM


Alexandra, could you please tell me how to make Kimchi Jigae? I have some homemade kimchi in the fridge that I have been wondering what to do with for months, and dont really know that many Korean dishes that I could make with it. I'd love to learn how to make this. Can you email me (my email is in the sidebar)? :)

Posted by: Bethany at March 15, 2009 10:57 PM


Good Morning Leah 9:58PM

My older brother and sister were required to learn Latin in high school but by the time I was in high school, various languages were being taught.
I took 3 years of French. I am conversant in it now and did some translating for a Haitian child who was here for medical reasons.
If I went to French Canada for a month I'm certain I would become fluent.
Rosetta Stone is excellent for keeping me up on it. I've always been so envious of people who can speak more than one language.

Posted by: Mary at March 16, 2009 7:32 AM


WHEN IT COMES TO TREATMENTS --- THE SCORE IS

ADULT STEM CELLS: 73 (YES SEVENTY-THREE)

EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS: 0 (ZERO)

FIND THE TRUTH AT http://www.stemcellresearch.org/

WHY WASTE MONEY ON RESEARCH THAT DOESN'T PRODUCE RESULTS AND COMES FROM A FOUNDATION OF DESTRUCTION.

Posted by: Cat at March 17, 2009 7:50 PM