Thursday, July 24, 2014

If you believe life begins at conception

You have a problem.

Between 30% and 50% of conceptions (some suggest more [1]) end in spontaneous miscarriage. This results in a far higher number of terminated pregnancies from spontaneous abortion (or miscarriage) than from intentional abortion.

Spontaneous abortion is the medical term for miscarriage.

The largest source of death is miscarriage, or spontaneous abortion. Indeed, if one considers a fertilized egg an “equally valuable” human life with “full human rights,” then spontaneous miscarriage is the single leading cause of death for "fully-valuable human beings".  And that includes if you are also going to say that life begins at implantation.

That would mean that God causes the most abortions if you are looking at this from a theological viewpoint ratter than a scientific one. In fact, perhaps we should go with the medical term "spontaneous abortion" rather than "miscarriage".

If we did that, would women who have miscarriages be guilty of aborting their foeti?  Even if we go beyond conception, we also have miscarriages up until birth and still-births.

The question is then "when does a foetus become viable"? 

In a secular society, which is what the United States happens to be, it really isn't the place of religion to dictate that type of decision.  In fact, it is is properly a decision which should be made by a women informed by her physician: not the state.

And definitely not religion.

Especially if god happens to be the worst culprit for causing abortions.

Aditionally, you also have to admit that one needs to provide proper pre-natal care if you are going to take the attitude that the pre-born have some right to life.  Unfortunately, most of the ideologically pro-lifers hate "Obamacare", let alone a single payer system of health care.

In fact, I find the ideologically "pro-life" tend to be lost on the actual concept of all this.

Especially since most "abortions" happen naturally.

[1]  The President's Council on Bioethics,  PCBE: Transcripts (January 16, 2003):  Session 1: Early Embryonic Development: An Up-to-Date Account

Another Botched Execution - Arizona Inmate Takes 2 Hours to Die


Joseph Rudolph Wood III

LA Times

A convicted murderer in Arizona gasped and snorted for more than 90 minutes after a lethal injection Wednesday, his ATTORNEYS and witnesses said, dying in a botched execution that prompted the governor to order an investigation and the state Supreme Court to mandate that the materials used in the procedure be preserved. 

Joseph Rudolph Wood III's execution almost certainly will reinvigorate the national debate over the death penalty. He received an injection at 1:52 p.m. at the Arizona State Prison Complex in Florence. The execution became so prolonged that reporters witnessing the execution counted several hundred of his wheezes before he was finally declared dead at 3:49 p.m. — nearly two hours after the procedure began. 

The incident comes in a year in which lethal injections had already triggered controversy over botched procedures and secrecy.

Any street junkie in the country could do a better job than these bumbling idiots in charge of the lethal injection protocols. And where are all the self-proclaimed Constitutional scholars.  Any hint of violating the 2nd Amendment and they're up on their high horse, but violating the 8th is no problem for them - the hypocrites.

Oh, and let's not overlook the fact that he was a lawful gun owner who turned bad.  He wasn't a gang banger or a drug dealer, nor was he a polite and respectful gun owner. He was another dangerous maniac who should have been disarmed before he went berserk.

Wednesday, July 23, 2014

Billy Johnson [finally] says something intelligent.

I guess if I were to label someone a pseudo-intellectual, it would have to be the NRA's Billy Johnson since he can appear to think and say some interesting things, but (APU) they don't stand up to scrutiny.

In this case he accidentally made my case for me. That means he really doesn't think through what he says--he just likes the sound of his voice and thinks he looks hip.


Seriously,  if goofball wants to follow what the founding fathers believed in, then he should require military training in schools. 

After all, the Second Amendment does start out "a well-regulated militia being necessary for the security of the free state".

But, the "pro-gun" side wants to forget that part and say it's irrelevant, but that means the Second Amendment is garbage.

After all, why start the sentence with something that is unrelated to the rest of the sentence?

That is called a nonsequitur.  You are saying the Founding Fathers wrote gibberish.
The Second Amendment was implemented by the Militia Acts of 1792, not the Guns for Irresponsible Dickheads Acts of 1792.
 
In fact, did hard enough and do some serious research and you will find the part about the "well-regulated militia" (which means under civilian control--not an armed mob) is integral to the Second Amendment.

And yet, though this truth would seem so clear, and the importance of a well regulated militia would seem so undeniable, it cannot be disguised, that among the American people there is a growing indifference to any system of militia discipline, and a strong disposition, from a sense of its burthens, to be rid of all regulations. How it is practicable to keep the people duly armed without some organization, it is difficult to see. There is certainly no small danger, that indifference may lead to disgust, and disgust to contempt; and thus gradually undermine all the protection intended by this clause of our national bill of rights.--Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution 3:§§ 1890
I've noticed the hemming and hawing whenever anyone mentions that the Second Amendment right is tied to the responsibility of actually serving in an Article I, Section 8, Clause 16 Militia.  Not saying that you are liable for service as a member of the "unorganised militia" since that designation confers no right or duty other than you can be called up for service.

It's the same thing as saying having a draft card makes you a member of the US military.

Anyway, I can guarantee that once it becomes obligatory and the duties are reimposed that we will see a repeat of what Justice Story mentions above.

So, I say bring it--make people perform the requisite duties under the Second Amendment.

And that means military training in addition to marksmanship.

Then, let's see how many people will be screaming for their Second Amendment rights.

BTW, I support your Second Amendment right--please go to your nearest National Guard recruiting office to exercise it.

As I said, that's not what you want to hear, but what you should be hearing.

See also:

Tick, Tock, Glock

One of the problems with the gun violence debate is that it tries to be scientific in how it presents the issue.  That works well if you just want to go by numbers.  But numbers don't always get the point across.

The "pro-gun" side has used emotion (fear) to get its point across for ages.

The blog "Thoughts at Large" came up with a really great post, Tick, Tock, Gloc, which poins out how the numbers play out:
According to the Brady Campaign, on average, for the five most recently available years for which statistics are available, every day in America there are:
291 people in America are shot (including 52 children (ages 0-19)
87 people die from gun violence:
32 are murdered (including 6 children)
51 kill themselves (including 2 children)
2 die unintentionally
1 is killed by police intervention
1, intent unknown
205 are shot and survive:
148 shot in an assault (including 34 children)
10 survive a suicide attempt (including 1 child)
45 are shot unintentionally (including 9 children)
2 are shot in a police intervention
 If we take these numbers and divide them equally over the course of a day, this is an average day in America.
The rest of the blog does a good job of how this plays out in reality.

Now repeat this, every day, until enough of us demand a better society.

Tuesday, July 22, 2014

Bibles and guns? does this offend you?

I'm sure the type of person who needs to have flags, guns, and Bibles probably won't find this too offensive.  It might even be a type of Rorschach test to see where you are on the political spectrum.



In Matthew 25:31-46, Jesus identifies himself with the hungry, the poor, the sick, and the prisoners.  That passage is considered a major aspect of Christianity and is the cornerstone of Christian socialism.  Another key statement in the New Testament that is an important component of Christian socialism is Luke 10:25-37 that follows the statement "You shall love your neighbour as yourself" with the question "And who is my neighbour?", and in the Parable of the Good Samaritan Jesus gives the revolutionary response that the neighbour includes anyone in need, even people we might be expected to shun.

Socialism owes more to the Bible than Marx.

Acts 4, verse 32:
"All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions were his own, but they shared everything they had."
and Acts 4, verses 34 and 35:
"There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from their sales and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need."
John Chrysostom explained his attitude towards the rich and wealth by saying:
I am often reproached for continually attacking the rich. Yes, because the rich are continually attacking the poor. But those I attack are not the rich as such, only those who misuse their wealth. I point out constantly that those I accuse are not the rich, but the rapacious; wealth is one thing, covetousness another. Learn to distinguish.

Big Surprise - Most Gun Owners are White, Male and Conservative

Pew Data
Guns dot com

According to recently published data compiled by the Pew Research Center, the majority of Americans who have a gun in their home are white conservative republican males living in rural environments with children under the age of 18.

To examine the demographic and political characteristics of gun owners and their households, Pew reviewed data gathered from 3,243 adults from April 29 to May 27. Of those, 1,196 said they or someone in their household owned a gun, pistol or rifle.

The survey spans the entire continental United States with 34 percent located in the west, 35 percent in the midwest, 38 percent in the south and 27 percent in the northeast, and with that regional differences emerge.

“White southerners are significantly more likely to have a gun at home (47%) than whites in other regions,” explains Rich Morin, senior editor at the Pew Research Center’s social and demographic trends project. “But because blacks disproportionately live in the South and are only half as likely to have a gun at home as whites, the overall rate for the southern region falls to 38%.”

Guns and Other Weapons at Airports

video platformvideo managementvideo solutionsvideo player