An Ol’ Broad’s Ramblings

May 15, 2007

Morning Coffee 5/15/07

Filed under: General News — olbroad @ 9:29

US soldier killed in firefight at peace meeting

An American soldier was killed inside Pakistan yesterday after an attempted peace meeting on one of the world’s most sensitive borders erupted in gunfire.

Several other Nato troops were wounded amid sensational claims that Pakistani forces were responsible. Pakistan said that one of its troops also died in the clash, but blamed militants for the shooting.

I listened to the news all day yesterday, and didn’t hear a word about this shooting. This is not good.

3 teens arrested in shooting at high school

Mesquite police announced Monday the arrests of three 17-year-old suspects after a weekend shotgun shooting at West Mesquite High School.

Latret Thompson, a Dallas student, got into an argument with some West Mesquite students at a school spring theater show Saturday, Mesquite police Lt. Steve Callarman said. Mr. Thompson then called two friends – Keldrick Payton and Lebreon Johnson – for help.

When did kids decide the only way to resolve problems was with a gun?

Pro-lifers ready for a comeback

Although last month’s Supreme Court ruling to uphold the ban on partial-birth abortion was a welcome boost for pro-life forces, they are still recovering from last year’s defeats.

Isn’t it a shame we have to do battle to save the lives of the unborn? You’d think anyone with a brain would realize what abortion really is…..murder.

Gingrich Says He May Be a Wild Card

The jostling among possible wild card entrants into the 2008 presidential race is heating up, with a former House speaker, Newt Gingrich, saying yesterday that there is a “great possibility” that he will mount a White House bid.

I like Newt. Smart cookie. But is he ‘presidential’? Hmmm…not in my opinion.

What am I, chopped liver? — Pol quits post over foie gras

“My integrity is at stake. My manhood is at stake. My character is at stake. It’s just not right for them to do this. I’m not going to let anyone walk on my integrity and my manhood,” Smith said. “This has never been done before. … If you don’t respect me as chairman, then take the committee.”

If this guy’s ‘manhood is at stake’ over goose liver, then he’s got some serious issues.

Should Bible be taught in schools?

Proponents of a proposal to teach a Bible-based curriculum in South Carolina public schools say it could help students unlock American symbolism, decipher religious references in literature and open up a world of historical and cultural understanding.

I think it’s a brilliant idea. The Bible is rich in history. The faith part is pretty good too, IMHO, but it would be nice for kids to learn that history didn’t begin the day they were born.

Reid sets Iraq litmus test

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) yesterday offered a unique litmus test for Democrats seeking a strongly anti-war supplemental, slating two votes to gauge support for competing plans for Iraq withdrawal.

Runnin’ Reid has learned NOTHING after being ‘praised’ by al Qaeda. Disagree with the war all you want, but when you are putting our soldiers in harms way, STFU in public!

Advertisements

16 Comments

  1. “Isn’t it a shame we have to do battle to save the lives of the unborn?”

    Yeah – it’s incredible (and sickening) that the same people who lecture us on “Republican wars on science” turn around and pretend that “when life begins” is simply a theological question.

    Comment by Calvin — May 15, 2007 @ 9:47

  2. I love it when Cal gets all sciency on us. Is there anyone out there who knows less of what he’s talking about than Cal when he talks about science? Serious question.

    Cal, why don’t you repost your argument on why it isn’t a theological question. I find it amusing.

    Comment by Jayce — May 15, 2007 @ 10:30

  3. I know more about science than you do about ethics, but that’s another story.

    How we treat life pre-birth is only theological to the same degree that how we treat life post-birth is. To believers, all life is sacred & holds an incalculable value. It’s not for us to decide that any life, regardless of condition, can be destroyed. But it is SCIENCE that shows us embryonic humans and post-birth humans belong in the same category – individuals of the species Homo sapien.

    Comment by Calvin — May 15, 2007 @ 11:50

  4. Jayce, attacking Cal on his knowledge of science does your argument no good what so ever. Like it or not, Cal is one smart cookie.

    Would you dispute that an amoeba is life? Is it intelligent life? Don’t know, but then, there is a LOT we don’t know. Do the pre-born feel pain? Oh, you betcha. They are alive. Obviously, the mother’s womb is necessary to gestate, but then, a post born baby also needs a mother’s care. Caring for the baby before it springs on the world is JUST AS IMPORTANT AS CARING FOR HIM/HER AFTER.

    Comment by olbroad — May 15, 2007 @ 4:07

  5. There goes Cal, calling out my ethics again… We could debate who’s been more ethical on here, but I know he wouldn’t want that. I know I’ve been a tad hard on him, but he’s been remarkably vile to me on this board (likely an indicator of his success in our debates).

    You can call Cal a “smart cook”, but his comments on science have proven that he’s far from competent.

    “But it is SCIENCE that shows us embryonic humans and post-birth humans belong in the same category – individuals of the species Homo sapien.”

    Please, expand on this.

    Comment by Jayce — May 15, 2007 @ 4:54

  6. I, for one, think it’s hilarious that somebody who pretends – and I stress the word pretend – to be governed by cold, hard science & empiricism could somehow be ignorant about something as basic as human life. Anyhoo, allow me to offer a basic sampling of real science (not secular fundamentalists like Sam Harris):

    From Human Embryology, 3rd Edition by William Larsen, Lawrence Sherman, S. Steven Potter, & William Scott: “In this text, we begin our description of the developing human with the formation and differentiation of the male and female sex cells or gametes, which will unite at fertilization to initiate the embryonic development of a new individual.” (p. 1)

    From The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th Edition by Keith Moore & TVN. Persaud: “Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoon) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.” (p. 18)

    From Human Embryology & Teratology, 3rd Edition by Ronan O’Rahilly & Fabiola Muller: “Although life is a continuous process, fertilization (which, incidentally, is not a ‘moment’) is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is formed when the chromosomes of the male and female pronuclei blend in the oocyte.” (p. 8)

    From Developmental Biology, 6th Edition by Scott Gilbert: “Fertilization is the process whereby two sex cells (gametes) fuse together to create a new individual with genetic potentials derived from both parents.” (p. 185)

    From Van Nostrand’s Scientific Encyclopedia, 7th Edition by Douglas Considine: “At the moment the sperm cell of the human male meets the ovum of the female and the union results in a fertilized ovum (zygote), a new life has begun.” (p. 943)

    From Langman’s Medical Embryology, 7th Edition by TW Sadler: “The development of a human begins with fertilization, a process by which the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote.” (p. 3)

    From Patten’s Foundations of Embryology, 6th Edition by Bruce Carlson: “Almost all higher animals start their lives from a single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote)… The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual.” (p. 3)

    Comment by Calvin — May 15, 2007 @ 5:49

  7. “I know he wouldn’t want that.”

    Au contraire: fire away. (I’ve never expressed pleasure at any deaths aside from Hussein & Zarqawi.)

    Jayce, I hope you’ll sincerely consider what I’m about to say, because I honestly hope it’s something that you’ll come to realize someday: no matter how much you’d like to, you simply can’t change what you’ve been. But there’s always a chance to change what you are.

    I know you haven’t exactly grasped the concept of self-reflection in the past (http://jaycec.blogspot.com/2007/03/letter-to-editor-by-jimmy-kiser.html), but there’s still an opportunity for you to do so now.

    Take it or leave it.

    Comment by Calvin — May 16, 2007 @ 7:48

  8. While it’s fun to debate you in anything science related, given your severe handicap, this new line promises to be much more rewarding.

    You did offer great advice with this: “no matter how much you’d like to, you simply can’t change what you’ve been. But there’s always a chance to change what you are.”

    The problem is, you shouldn’t be typing in on a blog, but rather saying it in the mirror.

    On the subject of changing…

    You call me close-minded and advise me to broaden my horizons. This coming from the guy who proudly trumpets the religious conservative line, guzzling the Kool-Aid right down to the last drop. And you have the balls to tell someone else they need to broaden his horizons??? That’s fucked up, no way around it.

    I can say the following things with a high degree of certainty…

    You were born into a Christian family. If you weren’t, it’s highly unlikely that you’d be Christian.

    You were born with extreme right-wing parents. If you weren’t, you’d likely be far from the chest thumping conservative that you are.

    You believe what you believe not by any virtuous means, but by pure brainwashing. It sounds harsh, but I see nothing to dispute it.

    I was brought up Christian. I was confirmed. I prayed every night before bed. Then one day I began to question why my beliefs didn’t jive with evidence and rational thought. From there I became what I am today.

    I remember thinking gay people were disgusting and wrong. I thought that because that’s what my friends thought, and a lot of adults that I knew (my parents excluded). Then I started realizing that like me, they couldn’t choose who they loved. Like me, they were good people. Like me, they shouldn’t be discriminated against.

    I remember my first year of college when I commuted from Fond du Lac to Oshkosh. I would listen to Rush Limbaugh every day. Then I’d regurgitate his arguments amongst my friends, whole heartedly believing every word I/he said. I was a full-fledged conservative. My parents were conservative, most of my friend’s parents were conservative, and I became one too. But then I started thinking about some of their policies… things like the war on drugs, religion, foreign affairs, freedom, morality… and I became much less of a republican.

    You see, broadening my horizons and having an open mind about shit led me to become who I am right now, which will no doubt be much different than who I’ll be ten, twenty, fifty years from now.

    But you… where will you be? Your blind following of your ideology restricts you from ever opening up, from ever truly thinking for yourself. Your mind is already made up for you.

    The good news for you is that there have been plenty like you who have changed.

    That’s bad news for me; I like my monkeys dancin’.

    Comment by Jayce — May 16, 2007 @ 9:27

  9. Jayce, your emotional, and four lettered word, rant has not been edited, or deleted. However, that being said, I will not tolerate personal attacks of either myself, or others on this blog. This is your ‘official’ warning.

    Comment by olbroad — May 16, 2007 @ 11:32

  10. You ask,”When did kids decide the only way to resolve problems was with a gun?”

    I ask, “When did so many adults start telling kids that they needed a gun to protect them from thugs and that almost everyone who looks different is a thug or an Islamokazi?”

    We’re sowing the wind and reaping the whirlwind.

    Comment by grumps — May 16, 2007 @ 1:37

  11. How did Cal get his free pass?

    Comment by Jayce — May 16, 2007 @ 2:05

  12. Cal isn’t using bad language. You know full well I allow both you and Cal to speak your mind, but I do draw the line at personal attacks. Cal sites a variety of articles to support his stand. I haven’t seen a lot of ‘proof’ from your stand.

    And no, I’m not playing favorites. Even though I agree with a great deal of what Cal says, I don’t agree with everything, but he is entitled to state his view, just as you are.

    Comment by olbroad — May 16, 2007 @ 2:23

  13. Jayce, recycling your own self-righteous lectures doesn’t change the fact that you have a dishonest nature and have biogtries of your own to confront. Sorry, pal.

    Comment by Calvin — May 16, 2007 @ 2:26

  14. No personal attacks, ok?

    Comment by olbroad — May 16, 2007 @ 2:29

  15. If he’ll start acting human, I’ll stop calling him what he’s proven himself to be. That’s the best I can do.

    Comment by Calvin — May 16, 2007 @ 2:32

  16. Ok, but y’all keep it clean, please? 🙂

    Comment by olbroad — May 16, 2007 @ 2:43


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: