I have discovered a shocking procedure so gruesome to describe that it is an insult to our CULTURE OF LIFE (TM) that such atrocities are peformed in hospitals all around the nation!

"...making a vertical incision through the center of the ribcage in order to expose the chest cavity. The patient is attached to a heart-lung machine, in order for the surgeons to open the pericardium and remove the heart by dissecting the great vessels leading from it. The rear section of the left atrium and the pulmonary vein are the only parts of the patient's original heart left in place. The donor heart is then trimmed, in order for it to fit onto the patients remaining left atrium and vessels."

Sounds awful! Let's ban it!

What's it called, you ask? Why does it matter? I think it's called a "heart transplant" or something. No doubt a euphemism thought up by liberal doctors.

---------------

This is just the latest example of how democracy should not be interpreted as vulgar populism. The fact that a majority of Americans is against the procedure is irrelevant because the majority of Americans have absolutely no medical knowledge beyond what they've gathered from ER and Gray's Anatomy, and could be grossed out by anything from a medical textbook. It's also irrelevant because the Supreme Court is not an elected body and should not be taking majority opinion into consideration. We don't run our space programs by popular vote, nor should we do the same with medical protocol. The people making these decisions should be doctors, perhaps an appointed or elected panel of them, but certainly not judges or laypeople.

In addition, the anti-intellectual emotionalism is something I'd expect from the average American, but not from a Supreme Court justice. It's really quite simple. The only issue that is at stake is whether a fetus is a living being. If it isn't, as virtually all the scientific evidence shows (no developed brain, no ability to feel pain, no frontal lobe activity, no independent existence), then it doesn't matter how we get rid of it and your being grossed out by the procedure is irrelevant. If it is living (an idea that so far has only been supported by religious declarations), then this method is no more wrong than all the others. Either way, this 'issue' is not what we should be arguing about - it's been crafted to grab the attention of the idiotic public who can't follow an argument beyond a bumper sticker slogan.

Really, what do any of these 'days' accomplish besides making the left a ripe target for parody on the next episode of South Park? Is it going to advance gay rights? Is it going to get laws changed? Or is it just going to give more fodder to idiots who prattle on about the 'gay agenda'?

If student activits took half the time that they spend on empty rhetoric, making colorful posters, and worrying more about the tone of certain words than actual issues, and instead spent it educating themselves about the issues, coming up with substantive arguments, and taking meaningful political action, we could have a real revolution on our hands. These 'days of tolerance' are merely another example of how capitalism absorbs the opposition, keeping it placated by making the students feel that they are accomplishing something by taking part in meaningless pageantry.

The modern left is a joke. Oh, to live in the glory days of student anarchists...

Hell's Liberal, don't even try telling me you can't see what's wrong with your argument. Your owning a gun makes it MUCH EASIER for you to harm someone, which is the whole point and sole reason for you owning it. Basically what you're saying is that the government should trust every single one of its citizens with the same level of responsibility as police and military (which I agree has not been much lately, but certainly should be a higher standard).

Actually this comic strip's argument applies to this issue here too. Conservatives, the NRA, and the gun movement have been responsible for flooding this country with more guns than people so that now they can say 'banning guns won't work, there are too many and criminals will get them anyway.'

...wanting to **** someone who looks like Miss America makes someone 'mentally ill', regardless of their purported age. Poor judgment, perhaps, but cases like this just show how arbitrary our laws regarding this are. Age is a number. What men see is a woman that has reached physical maturity.

Fourth paragraph (second after the quote). You have "incumbant".

Good post otherwise.